Official Thread XBOX Hardware

My Current Console Is....


  • Total voters
    37
Status
Not open for further replies.
... so any new customers can buy what is hopefully a $299 lockhart or a $499 scarlett.
Well, at least I agree with you on the pricing. A $100 difference just makes no sense to me. $299 might actually work for Lockhart (Xbox Two S), imo. Especially since it's all digital, the price will drop to $250 easy after a year or maybe even less time, possibly reaching $200 faster than we're have seen a console go before. If they position it right and price it right away the start, it could really move some units.
 
Well, at least I agree with you on the pricing. A $100 difference just makes no sense to me. $299 might actually work for Lockhart (Xbox Two S), imo. Especially since it's all digital, the price will drop to $250 easy after a year or maybe even less time, possibly reaching $200 faster than we're have seen a console go before. If they position it right and price it right away the start, it could really move some units.

Yeah they need a $200 price difference for it to make sense.
 
Sony had the better or at least more mature dev tools earlier this gen too, MS seems to be running late again but at the end of the day it probably won't matter

I thought i read that MS's dev kits were not complete hardware. Impossible to say, however. I was thinking it would be Lockhart they were referring to but that doesn't square with them being described as close in power.

Regardless, any talk of who is more powerful than who is moot at this point. We really don't know how it will shake out when final dev kits hit Devs' hands. Hell, I doubt even Sony's kits are final.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Kvally
Obviously you don't know anything about 5G other than it's being rolled out slowly, read up on how poorly it performs in real life vs the hype that the cell companies were putting out there before launch. If you are near a tower and outside you'll be fine but the signal doesn't travel very far so they are going to need to build out tens of thousands of towers which makes it cost prohibitive so good luck seeing it cover as many areas as 4G, also even if they were able to do that the signal doesn't penetrate through walls well, it's flawed technology.

Xcloud is streaming is 720p right now and even MS admits it's running into some issues and that's totally fine because it's in it's testing phase it's not in it's final form so we'll see how it turns out but what's the point of streaming at home? you'll get an inferior experience to owning a piece of local hardware. Gaming isn't like streaming a movie, if the res just dropping was all you had to worry about that would be an annoyance but you could get over it, when it comes to games more than just the res would drop though and it will impact gameplay.

If they want to offer it as an option and not a replacement that's totally fine but when people say that they think streaming will be just as good as on hardware or that they would rather play a streaming gaming system than have a console I think they are trying too hard to be a cheerleader and not thinking more about what their own experience will be. Also let's not forget right now they seem to be focused on mobile vs streaming at home and carrying around a controller in your pocket to play console games the way they are designed to be played on a 6 inch screen running at a lower native res than your phone can output is hardly going to be ideal. They want to sign people up to another service, they are a service based company but this isn't a service I've heard people crying out for.

I've said in the past that power differentials won't make a difference next gen because they'll be so close, hell I've said it a few times in the last few posts, Digital purchases and BC are going to be a fairly big thing in keeping people in either the PlayStation ecosystem or Xbox ecosystems when the new gen comes. In the past we could all just go trade in all of our old games towards new hardware, now a large chunk of people are buying all digital and they have games that they'll just lose if they don't stick with their current console of choice. Streaming to your phone etc isn't going to do a whole lot one way or the other and if MS doesn't come up with a lot of high quality 1st party games it's not going to bring new people over regardless of what sub services they offer.

One thing to remember as well- Diminishing returns will be in full effect between these two. There won't be much visible difference. There may be some slight framerate advantages here and there, but if games are on the same engine, my money is on them being nigh-on indistinguishable. Sony will have better looking first party games because that's the level they play at already. The developer will make the difference as always. Unless one can raytrace when the other can't... Which I doubt.

I've got a PC with a 2080 Super and a 12-core CPU and 32 gigs of ram. Safe to say it will out-class what the new consoles can do. I'll say this- I've got the Witcher 3 running with Reshade and all that at at least 60 fps (at ~1200p as that's my monitor's res). Does it look better? for sure. Did it make playing the Witcher 3 on the One X even look bad? No. I was actually surprised that I wasn't as stark.

Granted, it's an older game with older rendering tech, but it's still pretty much top of it's genre for visuals. You have to look closely to really appreciate those extra details (like the hairworks), and I love that, but once you get used to it, it's almost moot. The art direction has a more meaningful impact, and that can communicate beyond tech limitations. That's just visuals though.

The increase in power should bring an increase in complexity and physics as well, but like I said, the power differential will likely be moot either way.

Also granted, I'm playing the PC on a much smaller screen and those differences would be much more noticeable on a 65in tv.... I may have to hook it up sometime, lol...
 
Having to develop for multiple consoles always comes at a price, always has and always will especially when you are supposedly going to keep supporting all of your current gen machines as well as next gen for a long time to come. How big of an impact? nobody knows but you can't develop fully for Scarlett if the same game has to scale down to work on an X1S, there will have to be some compromises made. To me that's the bigger issue their insistence that they want to keep supporting the older hardware for a long time, that's going to do more to hold things back than lockhart.

Having to develop for the X1, X1X, Lockhart and Scarlett is going to spread things fairly thin. If they are going to want lockhart to be a thing they'd be better off shutting down support of the X1 family of consoles after all of it's currently announced games are released and quickly stop manufacturing them so any new customers can buy what is hopefully a $299 lockhart or a $499 scarlett. Retailers aren't going to want to have to make room for 5 xbox consoles anyway and MS doesn't need to keep making old machines, just let the inventory run out and focus totally on the new gen.

I'm just trying to keep track of the narrative...
First it was "Lockhart is going to hold back Scarlett" now it is the entire 'Previous generational line' will hold back Scarlett.
The problem with the first statement is that I addressed it with the CPU makeup of Scarlett & Lockhart. According to the leaks they both have the same CPU that is clocked similarly which is orders of magnitude better than those Jaguar Cores in the CURRENT Generation systems. Scalability is a thing in graphics engines (the Witcher 3 runs on the Switch.) There is a path of logic that needs to be addressed when talking about this stuff; Scalability = Graphics Engines/CPU instructions capable of running on slower hardware. Scalability is inherent with almost all modern game engines and that is something that is thought up during the design process. As long as the hardware is contemporary it will scale.

With the second statement I can assure you almost with certainty that Microsoft isn't going to DESIGN & PROGRAM a game for Scarlett that scales perfectly to run on X1X. The reasons being that they are ENTIRELY different architectures and the CPUs are generations different. IF for some reason they do an X1X version of a game that was designed around the strengths of Scarlett it will come YEARS later with vastly inferior results...(see again Witcher 3 running on Switch vs PC.)

The thing I agree with you on is that I believe Microsoft will phase out support and supply for the S, One, and X models once the new consoles hit. Not just Microsoft but I believe Sony will do the same with the PS4/Pro. However there is another factor to consider; game sales and how they are impacted by consoles sold. Microsoft & Sony for that matter are going to do a slow phase out because publishers still know that on the onset of a new generation the new consoles are outnumbered by the old generation and releasing CROSS GENERATIONAL games that scale UP from the lowest denominator makes more sense in turning profit.
 
  • Agree
Reactions: Frozpot and Kvally
Well I hope they do well if they do end up PS5 only during the system’s first year.

People aren’t going to upgrade as fast as they did in 2013/2014 thanks to the 4K mid-gen consoles, as well as the fact that the PS4 is still keeping up to speed in modern game performance (outside of a few more recent titles).

Locking a big budget AAA game to only be available on a $500 console with a low userbase just isn’t “$mart” to me these days—especially considering that these upcoming consoles are doing far more in game compatibility.
_________



No one is “pretending”— the upcoming consoles are PC-like builds which is why they both are going to be backwards compatible out of the gate. It’s not “cross gen” in the way that we saw with PS4 vs. PS3 and Xbox One vs. Xbox 360. The PS3 and 360 didn’t have PC-like architectures. The PS4 and Xbox One DO—hence why the PS4 Pro and Xbox One X were able to be made. Like literally, the mere existence of the PS4 Pro and Xbox One X completely goes against your “they’re not PCs and it’s not scaling!”-points.

Developers are already making their games for multiple platforms/SKUs, and they want to since more players brings in more money—hence the recent trend with crossplay and why Sony had to let go on the restriction they had. The upcoming consoles will be designed in mind with what devs want.

Ecosystems are going to be BIG next gen, and creating complete segments as if we are still in the 2000s is becoming increasingly unsustainable. Too much money coming in from huge userbases thanks to digital purchases to just decide to completely drop all of them to shift focus to an expensive new console that’s going to take years to build up its userbase.

Well they want the transition from PS4 to PS5 to be the quickest ever so they will need the content to persuade people to move over.
 
Yeah, that's exactly why the Witcher 3 looked like s*** on high end PC, because the base X1 held it back. :rolleyes:

PC's and consoles aren't the same thing and you know that, consoles are specialized set hardware and if you really want to take advantage of it fully you have to do the work. If CDPR only worked on one set of hardware the game would have looked even better, they've said that themselves.
 
Last edited:
I'm just trying to keep track of the narrative...
First it was "Lockhart is going to hold back Scarlett" now it is the entire 'Previous generational line' will hold back Scarlett.
The problem with the first statement is that I addressed it with the CPU makeup of Scarlett & Lockhart. According to the leaks they both have the same CPU that is clocked similarly which is orders of magnitude better than those Jaguar Cores in the CURRENT Generation systems. Scalability is a thing in graphics engines (the Witcher 3 runs on the Switch.) There is a path of logic that needs to be addressed when talking about this stuff; Scalability = Graphics Engines/CPU instructions capable of running on slower hardware. Scalability is inherent with almost all modern game engines and that is something that is thought up during the design process. As long as the hardware is contemporary it will scale.

With the second statement I can assure you almost with certainty that Microsoft isn't going to DESIGN & PROGRAM a game for Scarlett that scales perfectly to run on X1X. The reasons being that they are ENTIRELY different architectures and the CPUs are generations different. IF for some reason they do an X1X version of a game that was designed around the strengths of Scarlett it will come YEARS later with vastly inferior results...(see again Witcher 3 running on Switch vs PC.)

The thing I agree with you on is that I believe Microsoft will phase out support and supply for the S, One, and X models once the new consoles hit. Not just Microsoft but I believe Sony will do the same with the PS4/Pro. However there is another factor to consider; game sales and how they are impacted by consoles sold. Microsoft & Sony for that matter are going to do a slow phase out because publishers still know that on the onset of a new generation the new consoles are outnumbered by the old generation and releasing CROSS GENERATIONAL games that scale UP from the lowest denominator makes more sense in turning profit.

You should tell MS to stop saying they are going to have scarlett games playable on older hardware, first of all that's a lie because a scarlett game wouldn't work on the X1S, it's a cross gen game. They have said even recently that they plan on supporting the older consoles for a long time so people don't have to upgrade. I'm not the one coming up with that messaging that's MS.

Lockhart is at least scalable because it's designed the same way as Scarlett it's just reduced in many areas, that doesn't mean that having to spend time developing for two consoles doesn't subtract from one but that's not going to end up being that big of a deal when compared to trying to keep the old consoles in the loop.

Witcher 3 on switch is downgraded heavily and a different developer had to do it years later, that's not what MS is saying they are going to do and it wouldn't make sense to do it that way.
 
You should tell MS to stop saying they are going to have scarlett games playable on older hardware, first of all that's a lie because a scarlett game wouldn't work on the X1S, it's a cross gen game. They have said even recently that they plan on supporting the older consoles for a long time so people don't have to upgrade. I'm not the one coming up with that messaging that's MS.

Lockhart is at least scalable because it's designed the same way as Scarlett it's just reduced in many areas, that doesn't mean that having to spend time developing for two consoles doesn't subtract from one but that's not going to end up being that big of a deal when compared to trying to keep the old consoles in the loop.

Witcher 3 on switch is downgraded heavily and a different developer had to do it years later, that's not what MS is saying they are going to do and it wouldn't make sense to do it that way.
How about stop saying they are lying when you don't know anything your self. Also, We have to wait to see it our self to know what is right what is not.
 
  • Agree
Reactions: Kvally
How about stop saying they are lying when you don't know anything your self. Also, We have to wait to see it our self to know what is right what is not.

A Scarlett game isn't playable on the One S, it's a cross gen game so that is a lie, it's BS marketing that people will spout off as fact.
 
PC's and consoles aren't the same thing and you know that, consoles are specialized set hardware and if you really want to take advantage of it fully you have to do the work. If CDPR only worked on one set of hardware the game would have looked even better, they've said that themselves.

Well it looks better/best on the most capable hardware...PC.
How do you think it will pan out for Scarlett in relation to weaker hardware?
These newer consoles are more like PCs than ever before. Yes the SOCs are customized but not to the extent that porting down from the best hardware (technically PC) will be an issue.
 
Well it looks better/best on the most capable hardware...PC.
How do you think it will pan out for Scarlett in relation to weaker hardware?
These newer consoles are more like PCs than ever before. Yes the SOCs are customized but not to the extent that porting down from the best hardware (technically PC) will be an issue.

The point is the more time you can spend on one set of specs the better it will turn out, scaling down to lockhart probably isn't going to be a huge deal because they share basically the same design so it will still pull some resources from Scarlett but it probably won't impact the higher end games too much. Having to work on Scarlett, Lockhart and then X1X and X1S is going to be rough.

As far the PC comparison others keep making it's just not the same, people can say "look at how good this looks on my $2000 gpu it's not held back" as if it couldn't have looked a lot better if that was the only GPU that was being targeted during the development process. That's why games like Horizon ZD hold up well to the best looking PC games right now, it may not be native 4K but a game that was developed for a 1.8TF GPU with enhancements made for a 4.2TF GPU is punching way above where it should be because of the ability of the developer to focus on the base PS4 and then upgrade the PS4 Pro version.
 
I find it odd that Sony designs for the lowest sku then ports up, and Microsoft designs for their most powerful sku then ports down.
Why do they do it different?
 
The first gen Scarlett dev kits were 10 TF's while the PS5 kits were 10.25 TF's. This is where the rumors about PS5 being slightly more powerful than Scarlett came from.
Recently MS has sent out new dev kits that are now 12 TF's. This is where the recent 12 TF Scarlett rumors have come from.

Other rumors out there are that Sony is having trouble keeping the PS5 cool even at 10.25 TF's.
 
  • Informative
Reactions: karmakid
That's why games like Horizon ZD hold up well to the best looking PC games right now, it may not be native 4K but a game that was developed for a 1.8TF GPU with enhancements made for a 4.2TF GPU is punching way above where it should be because of the ability of the developer to focus on the base PS4 and then upgrade the PS4 Pro version.

So, just so I understand correctly, the lowest console being developed for holds back other versions, unless it's Sony.

And for the less snarky response, if that were actually true, there would not be an obvious striation when looking at X1 v PS4 v pro v x1x, but it's almost universally a four tier comparison.
 
JinCA is entitled to what he thinks. I am not going to give him sh!t for that.

All I am saying is that we should hold off till both of them show their cards. Instead of saying this is bullish!t, we should just wait.

Also, whatever comes out this gen won't be normal that we are used to. It can be completely different.
 
So, just so I understand correctly, the lowest console being developed for holds back other versions, unless it's Sony.

And for the less snarky response, if that were actually true, there would not be an obvious striation when looking at X1 v PS4 v pro v x1x, but it's almost universally a four tier comparison.

Where did you get that from? How did you get that out of what I said? I was talking about how focusing on one piece of hardware allows you to do much more than you would if you had to focus on multiple pieces of hardware. I used Horizon as an example because it's still one of the best looking games of the generation and it's not even on the most powerful hardware, being able to focus on the PS4 allowed that to happen.You used the Witcher 3 as an example earlier, CDPR themselves have said that the game would have looked better had it been exclusive to a single platform.

As far as the PS4, Pro and One X they are all still part of the same generation of consoles and the hardware inside of the upgraded machines is by and large just souped up versions of what is in the base models so it's nothing like having to develop for something with a totally different CPU etc.
 
The first gen Scarlett dev kits were 10 TF's while the PS5 kits were 10.25 TF's. This is where the rumors about PS5 being slightly more powerful than Scarlett came from.
Recently MS has sent out new dev kits that are now 12 TF's. This is where the recent 12 TF Scarlett rumors have come from.

Other rumors out there are that Sony is having trouble keeping the PS5 cool even at 10.25 TF's.

The rumors of PS5 being 10.25tf were based on someone doing some math that doesn't add up, they were saying that the BUS would be smaller than it is on the One X, that doesn't make much sense. We really don't know anything about either of them other than what they've told us. They are both going to be very good consoles I'm sure and it sounds like nobody is going to feel like they are getting the short end of the stick when it comes to power.
 
Wooo wait are you trying to say again that weaker hardware doesn't hold back more powerful hardware?

I was more in the "lockhart will hold it back" camp before but if they are going to start releasing all of their games on PC anyway and still make all of their games for X1S/X1X that means they are already not going to be 100% focused on only Scarlett so I don't think one more piece of hardware that shares basically the same architecture as scarlett is doing to do a lot of damage.
 
Last edited:
Status
Not open for further replies.