It's over for Xbox. The series s can't run new games anymore. The should just stop selling it now
It's over for Xbox. The series s can't run new games anymore. The should just stop selling it now
It's over for Xbox. The series s can't run new games anymore. The should just stop selling it now
I'm still waiting for fricking 40k dark tide. Its got nothing to do with the console. Just lazy developers.
Darktide has problems with users with 30 series nvidia graphics cards, how the frick are they going to get it to run on the Series S?
This. It's incredibly frustrating neither fatshark or xbox will give even a confirmation that it's still being developed or any info. It makes me wonder if it really was shadow cancelled
I think it was just false advertising. They never had any intention of releasing on xbox at the same time. They are practically taking just as long over again. Are they developing it from scratch?
You aren't missing anything anon. The game is a janky, unfinished mess. Barely any content. They learned absolutely nothing from Vermintide.
>. The series s can't run new games anymore.
It can. Devs should stop forcing people to see ULTRA 700K TEXTURTS LOL and realize people at the end of the day want to play a video game
This. I don't see the point if these graphics if you are literally holding a magnifying glass up to the screen to spot the difference. As long as a game looks decent and doesn't hurt my eyes that's fine. Graphics is totally diminished returns.
Tell that to moronic zoomers.
>UHHH Developers???
>Helooooo please make games shittier
>my overpriced plastic toy cant handle this!!!
oh no!
t. Crying grachips "artist"
kys
go play on a bing bing wahoo tablet if you want 540p 12fps
SEETHING homosexual
I'm not the one playing on a dead console not getting GOTY because microcuck demands they make it run on 10 year old hardware.
sony couldn't do that even when they had all the advantage.
The only reason people like BG3 is the good graphics with close up camera work to be able to see the characters unlike other crpgs.
Well it's also pretty reactive.
I think that while the core story isn't that engaging and the characters are pretty normal, it's the delivery and level of reactivity on everything that people like.
It's just disappointing that we likely can't get this level of gameplay/choice reactivity without WotC funding the project
It's not even textures or resolution in this case. Larian have this moronic feature in BG3 where you can play splitscreen couch coop and apparently the series S can't handle 4 people split screen at once. Nobody will ever use this feature anyway, but Microsoft insisted that the Series S version of the game has the same features as the Series X version, so it's being delayed until they can figure out how to implement a feature that like 5 people in the entire world will use.
Larian just insists it must have the stupid co-op at launch instead of cutting it from the Xbox version and patching it in later. God I hate co-opgays.
Wrong, Xbox mandates that games be the same experience on Series S as they are on the Series X.
https://www.gamespot.com/articles/baldurs-gate-3-is-in-development-for-xbox-but-theres-a-series-s-snag/1100-6511819/
Yeah and Swen has the option to cut co-op for both which is the problem for Series S but he thinks it's a dealbreaker. It runs the single player fine right now.
Wrong, Xbox won’t let them release a game that is missing features compared to the Series X.
https://www.ign.com/articles/microsoft-engineers-helping-get-baldurs-gate-3-split-screen-working-on-xbox-series-s
Any game made with considerations for Series S is technically playable on the Xbox One X, the only difference being that the Xbox One X can actually handle 4k HDR while the Series S cant.
So cut co-op on the Series X too if they require parity they can patch it in when it actually works on the S and we can get the game earlier.
Series S has single handedly ruined this entire generation of games, by guaranteeing that the only difference they are allowed to have is a graphical update in comparison. All games have to be dumber down to be playable on the moron console, none can have more processing power than the lowest common denominator. They should have called it the Xbox Equity S.
https://www.dualshockers.com/baldurs-gate-3-debate-xbox-series-s-limitations/
Just make shit stable at 30fps. 60fps is a literal meme that got made real. I guarantee you could take 100 random people and show them random examples of 30 vs 60 fps and not a single person would be able to accurately identify the rate.
The Series S is the reason none of the cross platform games can do anything more than a 4k texture upgrade, because it can’t handle advanced processing. All the games have to be dumb down, but the Series X and PS4 are allowed to be prettier. The Series X and PS5 can handle way more but every game made for this generation is being gimped by the slow kid, and since all those game are also released on PC nothing is able to reach its full potential. That’s why all we are getting is fricking remakes.
>The Series X and PS5 can handle way more
uh huh
So how come the predecessor could run with 30fps on the ps4 but now they struggle with minimal better graphics on the ps5?
They have to start with a dumb game and upgrade the visuals incrementally to make it look next gen, instead of making a complex game and pushing the graphics as far as they can without sacrificing performance. They are working backwards because there is a ceiling on performance but not on the graphics.
Oh no worlds most powerful console btw, rdna 2..... Hahahahaha
I'd say devs still refusing to leave last gen and having to make new releases work on base PS4 and Xbox One are way more to blame for games being gimped
Xbox One X is more powerful than the Series S, forcing games to be playable on OG Xbone crippled that entire generation like the Series S is doing to this generation. Forcing it be playable on bth the Series S and OG Xbone means the Series X will always have shit games. If it was just Series X and Xbox One X the games would be better than including the Series S.
Games don't come out on Xbox one anymore it's dead and the one X is not more powerful
The Series S can’t handle 4k, or even upscale 360 games like the Xbox One X. The Xbox One S has more in common with the Series S, than the Series S has in common with the Xbox One X.
https://www.windowscentral.com/xbox-series-s-more-powerful-xbox-one-x
One X is a 30fps machine, Series S aims for 60. Cyberpunk looks and runs better on the Series S with a native current gen version.
>1080p @ 60 fps
vs
>4k @ 30 fps
Not quite the flex you think it is. The Xbox One X is more than capable of playing 1080p at 60 fps if not 120 fps.
>4k @ 30 fps
cyberpunk is 1440p on one x
That game is just shit, and by forcing to be playable on last gen made it worse. I played the PS4 version on release on PS5 and had zero issues. They ruined their launch by not going all in on next gen to increase the sales because no one had PS5s back then.
>The Series S can’t handle 4k
not true. It depends on how complex the game is to begin with
>even upscale 360 games like the Xbox One X
It could, but it's more of an issue of making sure it's just 360 games that have their flag set, since it's clear that they didn't do a very sophisticated audit of the One-X enhanced games. They just blanket set the One X enhancements on for Series X and off for Series S, since some of them are for more recent games that were designed to use the enhanced VRAM space whereas the 360 games probably don't need it
What the Series S DOES get is FPS boost, which I'd argue is a bigger deal than resolution boost
Not actually 4k
https://www.windowscentral.com/does-xbox-series-s-support-4k-gaming
Did you read the article?
Yes, the Series S does some light upscaling on games to fit them to a 4K screen IF THEY ARENT AT 4K ALREADY
What I posted were games that actually render at a native 4K resolution because the HDMI output on the SEries S DOES support 4K
It's the same way your Series S supports 4K Movies as well. It's not upscaling a movie if the files themselves are 4K images
That's a code decision by Microsoft to not bother vetting each and every One-X-Enhanced game to see if the Series S could handle it, and just making a lazier decision to relegate One-X-Enhancements to the Series X.
The One X enhancements are turned on by either a switch in the game code or in the OS that looks for them.
They aren't dynamically turned on or off based on how strong the hardware is, it's an arbitrary code mechanism
The point here is that Microsoft made a blanket decision with it because the One X enhancements run the gamut from 4K textures that fill up the full 10 GB of VRAM (which the Series S could not handle) to just up-scaling old 360 games (which the Series S absolutely COULD handle).
They didn't bother checking each and every enhancement for Series S Compatibility, because that would be laborious
Interlaced 4k is not true 4k just like the PS4 couldn’t do true 4k until the PS4 Pro came out.
It can only handle Xbox One S upscaling, not Xbox One X 4k enhanced upscaling.
https://www.theverge.com/2020/9/14/21435831/xbox-series-s-backward-compatibility-one-x-enhanced-mode
Bg3 PS5 only
>The Series X and PS5 can handle way more
way more what?
there being no visual difference between 30 fps and 60 fps is a meme. I can tell immediately when my fps has dropped down to 30, as can anyone who has played on better hardware than some outdated shitbox
more like its gonna force these shitty devs to do some fricking optimizing for once.
You can’t force a an OG Xbone to perform like a PS5, they only company that can do anything close to that is Nintendo which is why they won this generation. All cross platform games are just pretty morons because they are being forced to be playable on a console that is worst than a last gen Xbox One X.
It's why I haven't needed to update my rig in 9 years, even though it was mid range back in 2014. Outside of Cyberpunk which was a shit show bug fest what other games have their been that demand a powerful PC. That's not a challenge I'm honestly blanking because of how graphically/performance low end this decade of gaming has been.
>on the moron console
that's the Black folktation 5 though.
Oh my god you are stupid. They could cut the shitty co-op from ALL XBOXES on launch and release fine.
>Microsoft policy that enforces gameplay feature parity across Xbox Series X and S.
Learn to fricking read you fricking moron. It’s not up to Larian, they should just not even bother making games for Xbox morons. The only reason mouthbreathers like you think the only difference is a graphical upgrade is because they forced that to be the only difference allowed. Starfield is going to suck if it is playable on the Series S.
>enforces gameplay feature parity across Xbox Series X and S
Yeah and if they cut the co-op from BOTH X AND S then there will be parity you drooling shit for brains
What don’t you understand, they won’t let them release a shittier version for Xbox just like they won’t let them release a shittier version for the Series S. It’s literally the Equity console.
>they won’t let them release a shittier version for Xbox
Shittier version than PS5? Yes they will. They only require feature parity between X and S.
You're the one not understanding that they can cut the feature in question to have parity and launch in fricking september same day as PS5
No, you're misunderstanding
Both Xbox versions have to have the same features, but the Xbox versions are allowed to have different features from the PC or PS5 versions
So instead of just releasing a no-splitscreen version of BG3 on both xboxes and then patching it in later, they're insisting that the Xbox versions must have splitscreen when they launch on the console
Xbox would allow that. Larian is the one who is insisting that they'd rather hold up a version for Xbox to make sure both have splitscreen rather than just releasing a no-splitscreen version today
>All games have to be dumber down to be playable on the moron console
You realize the Series S has a CPU that's equally as strong as the PS5's and Series X's, yes?
>none can have more processing power than the lowest common denominator
Well it's a good thing that the PS5's CPU is actually marginally slower than the Series S's
What has a greater effect on games, the CPU or the GPU? The Series S has a better processor because it a cheaper upgrade that gives the illusion of being an upgrade but it’s a distraction from the GPU bottleneck. The Series X has 12 TFLOPS to the Series S 4 TFLOPS. If you put an SSD in the Xbox One X it would have out Perron the Series S even more since that’s all the Series S has over the Xbox One X. Loading a game at 1080p faster is not really an accomplishment.
>What has a greater effect on games, the CPU or the GPU
CPU. CPU is almost always the bottleneck on actual game design and what kinds of games you can run. And the beautiful thing about video games is that, unless you're running a musou, RTS, 4X or Grand Strategy game, you can just drop asset quality and resolution to get around most GPU issues
If you're wondering why games during the 7th gen were kind of basic mechanically a lot of the time (beyond the courting of more mainstream audiences), it had to do with the fact that the 360 CPU was a giant piece of shit at the time but it was also the easiest system to develop for from a coding perspective.
>If you put an SSD in the Xbox One X it would have out Perron the Series S even more since that’s all the Series S has over the Xbox One X
Yeah but games designed for One X could not ASSUME you have an SSD, which affects how they were designed and how fast they could assume assets could be loaded in
>Loading a game at 1080p faster is not really an accomplishment.
The resolution isn't really the same as 'loading a game'
The GPU has three core tasks (it does other stuff but these three are the bigguns):
Holds the assets (textures and assets) that are loaded into a scene at a given moment
Rasterizes a frame from those assets
Holds a given number of frames in anticipation for the next time your screen refreshes and needs a new image to show.
There isn't really a GPU bottleneck here, particularly given that both Xbox and PS5 have new solutions to move more asset data in and out of memory faster than ever before. The only issue we're seeing is that devs don't really want to figure out weaker settings for the SEries S (which is, ironically, something they already did last gen with Xbox One S and X versions)
>Read a deal with Sony
Next year it will come to Xbox and it will run just fine but now they can also part themselves on the back for somehow making a miracle happen on the Series S. This is why we need real journalism in the videogame industry, not yes men.
Starfield is doomed if it’s dumb enough to playable on the Series S. No Man’s 76 incoming.
>dumb enough to playable on the Series S
the series S is not a big road block. developers are just shit these days because there aren't enough white people to make games and run critical infrastructure at the same time.
>https://twitter.com/hazzadorgamin/status/1688137729228562432?s=46&t=wZFBhuZZF5_HeIeBMBNlWA
They might do a Series X Pro, and a Series X discless for some reason. I don't know anything about game development, but working on 3 sku might be annoying.
Series S can run games just fine if the devs don't insist on graphics parity and use a game engine that can ratchet down properly, including falling back on older tricks wrt static vs dynamic lighting, reduced dynamic light sources etc. (and in particular telling RTX to go frick itself in the ass with a cactus).
Microsoft probably is never going to lift the parity requirement for Series X and Series S because it's what ensures that those high-profile games released on Series X, when they come to PC through Gamepass *also* have a downgraded experience (from the Series S) that will work for most PCs. Without it, you'll get to see idiocy like the 32 GB RAM + 12 GB VRAM requirements like some PS5 ports already ship with. That just makes the product worthless to the large mid-tier majority of gamers.
And what makes Gamepass work is the scale of it. They *need* those subscriptions to remain at current numbers, or the whole thing comes down like a house of cards.
Basically this. There is nothing about BG3's core gameplay that's unworkable on Series S hardware. Heck, you could get a feature-parity version of this game running on a raspberry pi with sprite graphics and 480p prerendered cutscenes. Microsoft very deliberately ensured the Series S processor was essentially the same as its Series X counterpart to accommodate for real gameplay limitations like physics and entity scripting. Microsoft doesn't want lazy development processes that target needlessly high-end specs to get in the way of their market outreach.
cuckbox and sneedstation users can rope Pc masterrace
Damn, consoles can't play games? That is so new.
BG3 could run on a 360 if they didn't have actual monkeys doing the code optimisation
>The VCR Xbone can play RDR2
>But a game on vastly superior hardware can't play a game that doesn't look as good as RDR2
Unless R* comes out and say the Series S is underpowered, I don't believe these hack developers.
It’s a split screen issue. Same issue Halo Infinite had.
no 343 industries is just retarted. You can play in splitscreen even on xbox one
https://twitter.com/HaloCreation/status/1565852829381791744
BG3 co-op is too much to handle for the series S it's apparently a sub 30fps slideshow
It’s because it’s apparently seamless and you can explore the whole world independently. It seems like such unnecessary gloatware.
>top down crpg
>too much to handle
there is no way that's true
People can frick around on opposite ends of the map with multiple combat encounters and sex scenes and shit all going at once there's no limitations as it stands.
Since it has the same CPU as the series X it's pretty obvious they just went full moron on muh graphix then
this has to be snoy paying larian since they know xbox has all the RPGs under their belt now
>limitations
>for a turn rate rpg
LOOOOOOL, anyways who cares frick consoiles
That's what the media wants you to think. Reality is that sony has a timed execlusive deal. The series S is totally capable and is amazingly powerful for the price. You can buy one with a one year game pass plan under 250$ now. It's amazing value.
The real reason why it's having "development issues" is because of Starfield. They already pushed the PC port by an entire month while the PS5 port is releasing the same day as Starfield. They know releasing a game next to starfield is suicide, but at least they can try to get the only PS5 owners that won't be playing Starfield
In terms of Specs isn't the Series S just a digital only version of the One X?
Why didn't they just make a digital only Series X like Sony did with the PS5 versions?
They wanted a much cheaper alternative and making it digital only wouldn't bring down the price dramatically.
they fricked their devs over really bad though forcing Series X games to work on the SS though, surely they knew that?
They expected developers not to be lazy homosexuals.
there's only so much optimization you can do
Rockstar managed to get the VCR Xbone to play RDR2.
Meanwhile, the developer of I AM BREAD says the Series S is holding games back because of the CPU.
Or that one homosexual that said the Series S was the reason why Gotham Knights was 30fps, but it ended playing the game the best while the PC versions couldn't even run it at 60 with a 4090. Most developers are shit and they rely on the consoles specs to just brute force the game to work.
It’s worse the Xbox One X and a 1/3 as powerful as the Series X. Series S doesn’t even have 4k it plays games at 1440p, while the Xbox One X has full 4k HDR and does hardware enhancements to play backwards compatible games in 4k. The original Red Dead Redemption looks incredible enhanced with 4k upscaling on the Xbox One X, but the Series S can only handle Xbox One S upscaling.
No it's a cut down Series X designed around the idea that devs would be targeting 4k on the higher end machine. Instead devs are using the extra power to just brute force unoptimized garbage at 720p.
>new gen, oh boy lets see new and improved games thanks to much higher baseline of hardware
>just kidding, ALL GAMES MUST RUN ON LAST GEN CONSOLE LEVEL HARDWARE
frick microsoft in the ass holy shit.
you have current gen games running at 800p30 on xs/ps5 and you think games would've been any better if it wasn't for the series s?
>The AMD Radeon RX 5500 XT or its Nvidia equivalent, the Geforce GTX 1650 Super, are the Xbox Series S GPU equivalents
>benchmark score : 9,180
>With this in mind, the equivalent to PS5 GPU can be RX 5700 XT or RTX 2070 Super, based on the teraflop output, resolution, frame rates as well as graphical settings.
>16,890
and? current gen games still run like shit with low resolutions on sx/ps5, if series S didn't "hold them back" they would run worse
>having less shitboxes to optimize for would make games run worse
correct. no series S = more grafix = worse performance
No, their development efforts would go solely into thinking about getting it to run on xbox x and ps5 leading to much more optimized game both graphics and performance wise.
then how come games made for ps4 + xbone + series S + X + PS5 run much better than games made just for S, X and ps5?
Who cares about playing cross gen games? Theres nothing impressive about them.
but the claim was "more consoles to optimize for = less performance", those cross gen games are optimized for 5 consoles (7 actually counting base last gen) and they run amazingly at 4k60 on current gen, much better than those games optimized for 3 consoles
..while looking worse
IMO crisp last gen 4k60 visuals are much better than current gen 800p30 visuals
Ps5 exclusives prove you wrong. Game devs don't put any effort into making things run well the only time you get games that do run well is when you are playing them on hardware it wasn't designed around such as cross gen games. The series s is good for games as a whole.
>we have to... optimize?
>NOOO FRICK YOU MICROSOFT AAAAAA
I'm surprised Microsoft and Playstation don't get dedicated RAM for sound files and shit to help bring their systems closer in line with PCs. I imagine the fact that all the consoles have to share memory for both VRAM responsibilities and literally everything else is probably a bigger bottleneck than the Series S having the same amount of VRAM as last gen
Anon, it's not interlaced on the games I showed you.
Being able to do "true 4k" isn't magic. It's just a matter of whether the GPU can rasterize the image enough times within the targeted framerate, and then whether the cable can send those images fast enough
The Series S HDMI cable can handle 4K at 60 FPS, and the Series S GPU is almost DEFINITELY able to rasterize a game like Ori or Hades at 4K. The Series S is rendering the image at the EXACT same resolution as the PS5 or Series X, and at the same framerate too
>The Series S GPU is almost DEFINITELY able to rasterize a game like Ori or Hades at 4K.
Outputting a game like hades at 4k is a thing and Ori os another thing.
Because while a game like hades is outputted at 4k the game doesn't have 4k assets so the console hardware has easier time.
While a game like Ori and the will of the wisps has actual assets that reach 4k and even 6k. In fact Ori features an Xbox series X enhancement that outputs an oversampled 6k resolution at 60fps.
>The Series S is rendering the image at the EXACT same resolution as the PS5 or Series X, and at the same framerate too
Not exactly true, because even ps5 and series X real rendering resolution is usually slightly lower than native 4k and the actual output resolution is not real 4k for most demanding titles.
>Because while a game like hades is outputted at 4k the game doesn't have 4k assets so the console hardware has easier time.
I never claimed otherwise. You're absolutely correct.
My only point was that it's not like the Switch where the HDMI type is LITERALLY unable to output to 4K normally
>Not exactly true, because even ps5 and series X real rendering resolution is usually slightly lower than native 4k and the actual output resolution is not real 4k for most demanding titles.
Sure, but I was just talking about Hades in this situation.
My point was not that the Series S is able to do everything the Series X can do on all games.
My point was just that the Series S had some 4K capabilities, that it's not locked out of 4K altogether at a hardware level the way the Switch was
The Xbox Series S is definitely capable of outputting 4k because has hardware that at least some times can output videogames at that resolution unlike the switch which can barely output 900p for light titles.
But series S is definitely not meant to do 4k all the time for rendering videogames because for that there's series X. The 4k capabilities of series S are more for other contents such as YouTube videos or Netflix movies.
>But series S is definitely not meant to do 4k all the time for rendering videogames because for that there's series X
For sure. And I think that's kind of what the Series S is sort of meant to be. A more general entertainment platform where you can play the same games as the major platform but also have a nice size-conscious system for all your general entertainment needs.
I think that's why I like Xbox's strategy more: why make core players fight with casuals, poors and parents for the same hardware?
Granted, Playstation has more momentum going into this generation so maybe they're leveraging that
There are actually advantages in not having to output 4k games all the time, in fact this means videogames on series S are more light on SSD since they won't have ultra resolution assets to download and this also means the Series S memory (which is the same SSD as Series X) can handle loading times much faster than series X because it doesn't have to handle all the ultra heavy assets. So in the end you sometimes sacrifice 4k for better stability.
Absolutely. The issue is devs seem very hesitant to just drop asset quality on shit for Series S. Or they keep complaining about it incessantly.
Or weren't managing asset/mesh memory very well in the first place
>>new gen, oh boy lets see new and improved games thanks to much higher baseline of hardware
You mean Forspoken? You may need new glasses if you think games without a series s "holding it back" look good.
Xbox console names are the stupidest fricking thing ever
Not true at all. I for one am looking forward to the X box bawks Ecks and the Xbox box XS next generation.
Yeah they couldnt do "xbox 1, 2, 3" because then ps was a number ahead and people would be confused.
Its moronic
They shoudve went with 360 naming instead of XS series whatever.
Xbox doesn't need Baldur's Gate 3.
only kojima can save them
how much of that post-2023 will actually
>release in a good state
and
>be good
I'll say 3/4.
now show me ps5 games.
I have an Xbox One X just for playing upscaled and enhanced games like RDR, Fallout 3, New Vegas, and FFXIII. I wouldn’t trade it for a Series S if you paid me, it would be a downgrade in every way possible. I have a PS5 for next gen and a switch for exclusives. There is absolutely no reason to own a Xbox Series S or X. I also have a Steam Deck for everything in between.
I never understood why are people wanting S over X given the SSD difference and horrid gpu.
what you save isn't worth the problems or needing to buy extra proprietary SSD later.
S is super cheap. There is no way you can get anything to play modern games on S budget
They knew people wouldn’t buy the Series S if the One X was still available at the same price point, that’s why they discontinued it immediately to increase sales of the Series Shit.
There's a few people it's meant to appeal to
Parents looking for something for their kids
People who are genuinely poor and can't afford a $500 box + $70 new games, so Series S + Game Pass is actually really appealing (I know a fair number of these people actually)
Casuals who only want a CoD and Madden box to play with friends
enjoy 30 frames only on your 2012 netbook cpu
Did you the part where i said I have a PS5 for Next Gen game?
Xbox One X for enhanced backwards compatibility, for example it’s the only version of FFXIII that plays in 4k on any console.
Switch for Nintendo exclusives, with a Steam Deck for enhanced Switch exclusives and emulation.
I also use the Steam Deck docked to play 4k modded or pirated games.
if you have a steam deck to play switch shit why even have the switch too?
Not him but despite the cope from deck owners switch emulation on it is awful.
I had the Switch first, its a SX Core modded Animal Crossing edition with a 1tb microSD.
Series X has all One X enhancements for old games plus fps boost I guarantee FF13 is 4k on it
Maybe, but thats not a reason to upgrade it if that is the only reason I have an Xbox console at all. It’s still useful for specific games but not worth upgrades for zero exclusives. I still own games on xbox and have disc if the classics in case I want to play them. I had the Xbox One X so I still want access ti those purchases and the any classics I want to play. Same reason I still have a 3DS even tho I have a switch ,they both serve a purpose.
Those 360 games are better on the new Xboxes, New Vegas is 30fps on yours and 60fps on X/S
It’s not 4k on a Series S it’s basically the same upscaling as the Xbox One S. There is no reason to get a Series S if you have an Xbox One X. There are no Series X exclusives to justify the Series X over the Xbox One X either. It’s the sweet spot of upscaling and price, I can still play everything I own on Xbox in 4k and classics with 4k HDR enhanced backwards compatibility. For everything new I just get it on PS5.
gonna need one for starfield bud
If it’s playable on the Series S it won’t even be worth it.
>can't run a fricking point and click moviegame
LMAO
did you look at how much this game weight? Larian can't code for shit
>2023
>Still have no clue about the names of the current xbox consoles
I can't be the only one
you have to be moronic
A developer making a 100+ GB top-down game is screeching about hardware that is more powerful than their minimum pc recs
Devs are not to be trusted
I hope they cut the co-op. I don’t care bout it and they could always patch it in later if they make it work.
t. series s chad
That's not an option. Microsoft requires feature parity.
there'd be parity between both if neither one had co-op
You're mentally ill and it is unfortunate you continue to breath.
Between Xboxes yes.
It requires feature parity between the Series consoles. they don't require feature parity with Playstation or PC
Oh no, devs have to put actual effort into optimization?! NOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO
>diversity hires can't code
old news homosexual
They brought in MS specialists of some sort to help them get it running and still haven't got it ironed out
>the MS specialists
>no Durkadurka we don't need a fricking clock please just help us with this co-op shit
S's 8GB's of RAM is the real issue. 8GB RAM until 2028-30 is pretty fricking bad.
Well, 8 Gigs of UNIFIED RAM is the biggest issue
That being said, BG3 runs on a GTX 970, I don't think memory is that big of an issue, even for splitscreen.
Like. PS5 and Xbox Series X don't have 16 gigs of VRAM the way computers do, because computers can throw AI trees and sound files and shit into normal RAM and save VRAM JUST for meshes and textures and shit.
But the consoles have to split their 16 Gigs amongst literally everything.
>8GB RAM until 2028-30 is pretty fricking bad.
Yes but the hope, at least for me, is that the new tech gets actually utilized. PS5 Geometry engine, Xbox Sampler Feedback Streaming
The sooner the devs integrate that tech into their development pipeline, the sooner we will not only see these issues start to get resolved but we'll seen a lot of the PC ports get better too
Well the issue is primarily a memory issue where, if two players are in two different maps and you're playing in splitscreen, that means the game needs to load in two maps instead of just one.
This is one of those situations where they're probably running into a legitimate issue with the Series S's memory constraints.
My GUESS is that Microsoft is helping them implement Sampler Feedback STreaming, which is a much more granular method of asset loading/offloading where literally only what the camera is looking at and MIGHT look at is loaded into memory.
I don't know what the frick they are doing with it but since serues S can handle Diablo 4 I don't think the problem is on the memory side since X and S have the same memory infrastructure.
It's probably something else.
Even more so when bg3 on S should have less details than the ps5/XsX and as such should actually be much easier to stream assets from memory than on more powerful consoles. So i don't really know because if this is the case, the split screen mode should have problems on everything else too.
>console user pretends to understand technology
what world are you in that you think a console game doesn't already squeeze that kind of memory optimization just to run in its default mode? btw the concept you are talking about is called culling and is at least as old as 3D itself. and culling is not what sampler feedback does. you are a moron.
>what world are you in that you think a console game doesn't already squeeze that kind of memory optimization just to run in its default mode
Well my understanding is that half the reason so many AAA games run like shit is because the devs aren't really being economical with memory, even on the newer machines
>and culling is not what sampler feedback does
I wasn't suggesting it is. My understanding was that SFS makes it so that you load in an object's texture based not only how close the camera is to that object but also what part of the object is visible to the camera. So a globe being observed at point-blank distance normally has its whole highest-detail texture loaded in but with SFS, it would only load in the camera-facing part at its highest detail and the rest of the globe would either be pulled from the lower-detail version of the asset or not loaded in at all
>
Can't they just scale back things a bunch for the Series S? Why would it matter if there were lesser versions of games for potato machines?
Remember Perfect Dark? That game also had a simultaneous release on Game Boy Color, it looked and played nothing like main game. Same with the Tony Hawk Pro Skater series, they also had releases on GBC, GBA, DS, etc. And those games also looked and played differently, but were still fairly well received. Why can't we go back to that?
Why are people these days expecting a game to look, play and run exactly the same on a $300 machine as a $500 machine or even a $3000 machine? The expectations of current generation of people make no sense to me.