Next Generation Emulation banner

22301 - 22320 of 22426 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
10,451 Posts
Thanks for the feedback about the games I purchased.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
10,451 Posts

·
Crazy GFX coder
Joined
·
16,836 Posts
I have seen that and is interesting how they spin it as if was something negative with such a title. This why am one of those against the whole exclusivity bullshit. In this case I was ready to bash Microsoft but after reading the article the question is... is it really as the title make it look like?

The article itself responds and I quote:
"As our content comes out over the next year, two years, all of our games, sort of like PC, will play up and down that family of devices," Booty told MCV. "We want to make sure that if someone invests in Xbox between now and [Series X] that they feel that they made a good investment and that we're committed to them with content."
In this particular case is great for gamers and those who invested in Xbox as they won't be forced to purchase a new console right away just to be able to play the games being released soon. This is a consumer friendly practice and should actually be practiced by all companies IMO. I remember how Nintendo released many cross-gen titles such as BoTW and not forcing people to buy a Switch because of that.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
6,870 Posts
I actually thought they would be doing so for the entire life of the console, not limit it to a year or two, so that's a bit of a surprise. It makes sense to have support between gens.
Publishers aren't huge fans of releasing a game on a new console exclusively since those consoles dont have many users yet, so having your games be cross-platform for a little while (both MS and Sony seem to be doing it) is a good way to get games released on your new console.

Instead of only selling a game to the 4m people owning a XBSX, you get to sell games to the 4m people owning it, and the approximately 45-50m people who own a previous Xbox.
It's MUCH easier to get developers/publishers to make games for your console that way, it's why both MS and Sony went with the Xbox One/PS Pro concept, and it's why both of them appear to be pushing some type of cross-platform support between older and newer consoles.

Only thing I'm wondering is if MS truly plans to completely cut support between older and newer consoles, or if they'll keep support between the One and the X, while cutting out the S due to being too weak.
 

·
Crazy GFX coder
Joined
·
16,836 Posts
Only thing I'm wondering is if MS truly plans to completely cut support between older and newer consoles, or if they'll keep support between the One and the X, while cutting out the S due to being too weak.
They will have to and as the article explain is a model more akin to a phone upgrade. That being said I believe down the road older models will lose compatibility with newer games just like apps/games on phone lose compatibility with older models/OS. The one I see taking bigger advantage of this is Sony as it makes a smoother transition from the PS4 to PS5.

The only problem I see is that many still live in a world where one company has to lose in order for the other to win as they have absolutely no idea how business run this days. Those fanboys from both sides will cry a river because they care about hardware sales something that isn't really important anymore as business has changed. Even former Xbox executive made it clear recently on twitter.

 

·
Registered
Joined
·
6,870 Posts
They will have to and as the article explain is a model more akin to a phone upgrade. That being said I believe down the road older models will lose compatibility with newer games just like apps/games on phone lose compatibility with older models/OS. The one I see taking bigger advantage of this is Sony as it makes a smoother transition from the PS4 to PS5.
I think MS could keep the compatibility alive forever between the One and the SX if they wanted, they might go with 1440p on the One and 4K on the SX, or maybe 30fps for One and 60fps for the SX, this is why I thought they'd keep releasing the same games on both forever. I'm a bit surprised they'd only do it for a year or two, but I guess from a business point of view it makes sense to stop eventually.
 

·
Crazy GFX coder
Joined
·
16,836 Posts
I think it has more to do in keeping compatibility with so many devices over the time. The S may be the popular lower version but is quite under powered. I can imagine developers getting pissed to have to put more work in older devices than what is probably worth.

For instance at work we have some real issues at times to change or improve our software just because a huge customer persist in having Windows XP compatibility which heavily limits our possibilities. Apart from that teams have to be split at times to work in different versions in order to make sure everything still work on XP. That not just give us tons of extra work but we also lose developers who can spend that time actually doing something more productive than making sure XP is still compatible.... hope you get the idea ;)
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
10,451 Posts
That reminds me of people using Steam with Win 7 and not wanting to upgrade.

They seem to believe Win 7 online without updates is safe....

uh huh...

I hope your XP customers are offline...
 

·
Crazy GFX coder
Joined
·
16,836 Posts
This is in my opinion a smart and a bad move at the same time...a double-edged sword if you ask me that I hope works well for Sony.

PlayStation names Veronica Rogers as head of global business operations

The good thing I see is that she may bring her business expertise which now that all the old staff at Sony is gone is heavily in need. The bad part is that while she worked at Microsoft she had nothing to do with Xbox so her expertise may lack experience in the console business. Sony needs a highly charismatic team like they had at the PS4 launch but right now the whole team is shaping more like a bunch of corporate people that could probably piss their fan base making drastic changes.

As mentioned this a double-edged sword so it may turn into something positive and probably a more consumer friendly company who knows.

What are your thoughts?
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
10,451 Posts

·
Crazy GFX coder
Joined
·
16,836 Posts
I hope your XP customers are offline...
They have some serious security measures and are offline of course. Regardless... relying on XP until this day is crazy even if I understand why they do it. Many also do that just to take advantage of some old things XP allow but for us is just a pain to keep support for such a old OS while having to continually provide improvements and features in our software and hardware products.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
6,870 Posts
I think it has more to do in keeping compatibility with so many devices over the time. The S may be the popular lower version but is quite under powered. I can imagine developers getting pissed to have to put more work in older devices than what is probably worth.
I definitely didn't expect them to keep support for the S/original Xbox One, since it would look so bad to keep playing the same games as the SX. I just thought the X might still be supported since it still has half the power of the Series X.
To keep things in perspective: the S and the X played the same games at different qualities, despite the original Xbox One having 1.3 tflops and the X having 6 tflops. Meanwhile the X has 6 tflops and the SX apparently has 12 tflops. Keeping compatibility alive between the X and the SX would be "easier" than previous consoles.

I actually believed this could be turned into an advantage for MS over the PS Pro/PS5. The PS5 *supposedly* aims at being a bit stronger than the SX. So to keep compatibility alive between the Pro and the 5, they would have to release games on a PS Pro at 4.2 tflops and a PS5 at 16+ tflops.
In theory, it would be much easier for Microsoft to release games on both the X and SX, while Sony would eventually find it tiring to keep games on both the Pro and the 5.

I figured that with MS and developers being willing to support both the S and the X, despite how difficult it was, they might be willing to support the easier gap between the X and SX. That said, maybe developers specifically asked MS and Sony to stop that type of support because they were tired of it. It's possible MS was willing, but developers said "please stop, we don't appreciate having to do it".

I'm still glad we apparently get support for a year or two, it'll make the transition easier.
 

·
Crazy GFX coder
Joined
·
16,836 Posts
I definitely didn't expect them to keep support for the S/original Xbox One, since it would look so bad to keep playing the same games as the SX. I just thought the X might still be supported since it still has half the power of the Series X.
To keep things in perspective: the S and the X played the same games at different qualities, despite the original Xbox One having 1.3 tflops and the X having 6 tflops. Meanwhile the X has 6 tflops and the SX apparently has 12 tflops. Keeping compatibility alive between the X and the SX would be "easier" than previous consoles.

I actually believed this could be turned into an advantage for MS over the PS Pro/PS5. The PS5 *supposedly* aims at being a bit stronger than the SX. So to keep compatibility alive between the Pro and the 5, they would have to release games on a PS Pro at 4.2 tflops and a PS5 at 16+ tflops.
In theory, it would be much easier for Microsoft to release games on both the X and SX, while Sony would eventually find it tiring to keep games on both the Pro and the 5.

I figured that with MS and developers being willing to support both the S and the X, despite how difficult it was, they might be willing to support the easier gap between the X and SX. That said, maybe developers specifically asked MS and Sony to stop that type of support because they were tired of it. It's possible MS was willing, but developers said "please stop, we don't appreciate having to do it".

I'm still glad we apparently get support for a year or two, it'll make the transition easier.
16tflops? where you got that from? rumors say is around 9.2tflops and I don't think AMD have anything that strong right now let alone the price. 10-12tflops is a more realistic number and even the later is already at the limit if they want to keep a reasonable price.

Actually am surprised MS is going to stop support that quick as Phil once said they want to have backward and forward support for their devices like PC. When I think about PC support we know what happen if you try to run a game on a older machine but something like that can't be allowed in a console space. The idea I had was that they will keep support longer like the middle of next generation and then move on just like Apple/Android do.

I think the bigger problem here is the XB1 and XSX as there is so much power in-between that is not even funny. However, MS is exclusively talking about first party teams and third party can do whatever the want. That being said first party always makes better use of the hardware and always know what they do. I don't think scalability is an issue here but more parity. I can see the XB1 running games at 30fps and barely hitting 1080p while the XSX can run the game at 4k 60fps and the X1X doing 1080p 60fps.

That I think is what makes sense as well as show the capabilities of each system. In the mobile world that is what they do by offering different models and people just pick the one they can afford.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
6,870 Posts
16tflops? where you got that from? rumors say is around 9.2tflops and I don't think AMD have anything that strong right now let alone the price. 10-12tflops is a more realistic number and even the later is already at the limit if they want to keep a reasonable price.

Actually am surprised MS is going to stop support that quick as Phil once said they want to have backward and forward support for their devices like PC. When I think about PC support we know what happen if you try to run a game on a older machine but something like that can't be allowed in a console space. The idea I had was that they will keep support longer like the middle of next generation and then move on just like Apple/Android do.

I think the bigger problem here is the XB1 and XSX as there is so much power in-between that is not even funny. However, MS is exclusively talking about first party teams and third party can do whatever the want. That being said first party always makes better use of the hardware and always know what they do. I don't think scalability is an issue here but more parity. I can see the XB1 running games at 30fps and barely hitting 1080p while the XSX can run the game at 4k 60fps and the X1X doing 1080p 60fps.

That I think is what makes sense as well as show the capabilities of each system. In the mobile world that is what they do by offering different models and people just pick the one they can afford.
I said both 12 and 16 in my post by accident, the 16 was a typo, I meant 12. It was based on what Spencer said about being more than 8 times higher than the XB1 (over 10.3) and twice the X (12).

What I'm thinking mostly about is MS talking constantly about how they would use their software advantage to focus on "one platform across many devices, instead of multiple platforms across many devices". Having the X and the SX being 'one platform' would fulfill that goal, while splitting them would be the opposite. They also talked a lot about how they dont care about the vague concept of "winning", and only wanted people to game and have fun, so keeping games compatible across both consoles would also fulfill that goal.

I definitely wouldn't expect the original Xbox to keep being supported because really, that's a huge gap. I wouldn't even expect the games to be at 1080p, I think they'd go back to releasing games at 720p. Possibly even lower, which wouldn't make people happy. I just saw going from XB1->XBX to XBX->XBSX as a somewhat natural progression, keeping games alive on two sister consoles at once.
 
22301 - 22320 of 22426 Posts
Top