Should put this whole issue to rest (for a while, at least 😉).

  • AaronStC@lemm.ee
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    44
    ·
    edit-2
    1 year ago

    I don’t care about split screen but more evidence that the Series S was a mistake. At the very least Microsoft is going to have to ease up on the requirements.

    Edit: It has come to my attention that I need to improve my reading comprehension. This only affects the S. 🤦‍♂️

      • AaronStC@lemm.ee
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        8
        ·
        1 year ago

        I don’t see how I’m a fanboy. The Series X lost a feature because of the Series S. I’m sure the parity requirement had good intentions but I doubt this is the last time this will happen.

        As others are pointing out the Series S is selling well but it’s the weakest link.

        I guess calling it a mistake is about strong…

            • towerful@beehaw.org
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              7
              ·
              1 year ago

              To be fair, I heard a lot of rumours about it not coming to Xbox because Microsoft required parity of features.
              So, I can understand your misreading

      • blindsight@beehaw.org
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        6
        ·
        1 year ago

        Please respect the rules of the instance if you choose to comment here.

        The only rule at Beehaw is Be(e) Kind. Your comment was needlessly aggressive and abrasive and you could have made your point just as easily in a kind way.

        Thanks for keeping this a positive space for everyone.

      • eratic@feddit.uk
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        16
        ·
        1 year ago

        Most popular Xbox this generation, as opposed to… the second most popular Xbox this generation?

        • Carter@feddit.uk
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          3
          ·
          1 year ago

          The point being it’s hardly a mistake if most are buying it over the X.

          • Zorque@kbin.social
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            8
            ·
            1 year ago

            Is that because people actually want an S… or because they settled because they couldn’t find an X? Everywhere I go there’s tons of S’s available and almost no X’s available. Obviously anecdotal, but maybe it’s not so much buying it over the X as buying it because the X just isn’t in reach… either because of price (though if you can’t afford a hundred dollars extra for a console… you can’t really afford the console at all, and you’re just justifying it to yourself) or because of lack of availability in general.

            • Omegamanthethird@beehaw.org
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              7
              ·
              1 year ago

              Just a note, it’s not $100 difference. It’s $200 difference ($300 vs $500). Having said that, the only reason I got the SS was because I couldn’t get the SX. I tried and failed. I would have preferred a $400 digital version of the SX even. Settled for the SS. Had to get an SSD expansion card, feature parity is apparently not a thing, had to rebuy a couple games digitally.

          • eratic@feddit.uk
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            2
            ·
            1 year ago

            So, does that mean the X was a mistake since the S has more sales? What is your point

            • Carter@feddit.uk
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              3
              ·
              1 year ago

              No it means there’s clearly more demand for the S. My point is you claiming it was a mistake could not have been any less accurate.

              • eratic@feddit.uk
                link
                fedilink
                English
                arrow-up
                2
                ·
                edit-2
                1 year ago

                I never said it was a mistake? I’m just saying what you said was meaningless…

                The dreamcast is the most popular SEGA console of its generation. A raging success!

    • Venutianxspring@lemmy.dbzer0.com
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      10
      ·
      1 year ago

      I don’t think it was a mistake, it brought next gen gaming to people that can’t afford, or don’t need the highest spec machines. I have a series S so I can play Xbox games with my son, I also have a gaming PC and steam deck. The price of the S allowed me to justify buying this, but I wasn’t about to drop the dough on an X just to play a few Xbox games

      • Hypx@kbin.social
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        12
        ·
        1 year ago

        It’s less powerful than an Xbox One X. I think the problem is that they didn’t really think through what a console generational leap would actually consist of.

        • ampersandrew@kbin.social
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          12
          ·
          1 year ago

          I think they thought through just how important hitting that price point was, because it’s done very well for them.

          • Hypx@kbin.social
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            6
            ·
            edit-2
            1 year ago

            PS5 outsold both versions combined by around 2x. I don’t think it was nearly that big of a deal.

            • ampersandrew@kbin.social
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              5
              ·
              1 year ago

              And do you think that would have panned out better if the cheaper console option wasn’t available? Not to mention it would only leave them with the console that shared a lot of the same components as the PS5 during supply shortages as well.

              • Hypx@kbin.social
                link
                fedilink
                arrow-up
                3
                ·
                1 year ago

                Microsoft should really ask themselves why they couldn’t have procured more components, despite being one of the most profitable companies on Earth.

                • ampersandrew@kbin.social
                  link
                  fedilink
                  arrow-up
                  4
                  ·
                  1 year ago

                  I mean, unless their goal is to lose even more money on each console sold, I doubt they were interested in that. But that’s not their goal. Their goal is to get people subscribed to Game Pass.

        • masterspace@lemmy.ca
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          5
          ·
          edit-2
          1 year ago

          It’s less powerful than an Xbox One X

          Lmao, bruh, no one who has played games on both would ever claim that. It has slightly more raw graphical compute power while having a drastically weaker CPU, slower SSD, slower memory, and slower overall throughput.

          • Hypx@kbin.social
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            3
            ·
            1 year ago

            It has faster memory than the Series S. More importantly, it has more RAM. A few improvements here and there doesn’t make the Series S a real next-gen console.

            • masterspace@lemmy.ca
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              4
              ·
              edit-2
              1 year ago

              As someone who has a One X, a Series S, and a Series X, I can assure you that you have no idea what you’re talking about.

              The One X doesn’t get used anymore and the Series S gets used ballpark more often than the series X. Pretty much all games play a very comparable experience on it compared to the series X, something that cannot be said about the One X.

      • AaronStC@lemm.ee
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        3
        ·
        1 year ago

        Yeah, I guess calling it a mistake is a bit much but it’s clearly holding the Series X back especially in this case.

    • twistedtxb@lemmy.ca
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      8
      ·
      1 year ago

      Not everyone is able to afford a gaming PC, let alone a current gen gaming console.

      Series S offers them a great opportunity. It is far from a mistake.

      • MJBrune@beehaw.org
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        8
        ·
        1 year ago

        At this point you can make a 600 dollar PC that is just as strong as a console.

          • MJBrune@beehaw.org
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            4
            ·
            edit-2
            1 year ago

            Certainly but it will last longer. Although people are instant gratification machines that won’t take anything less.

            • YourFavouriteNPC@feddit.de
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              8
              ·
              1 year ago

              In what world is “It will last longer” an answer to “I can’t afford that”? I doesn’t matter how long something will last if people don’t have the extra money to spend on something more expensive.

              • MJBrune@beehaw.org
                link
                fedilink
                English
                arrow-up
                3
                ·
                edit-2
                1 year ago

                Because they will likely buy another thing in that same time. You don’t need an entertainment box immediately. You can wait, save, and buy an entertainment box that can do multiple things.

            • fiah@discuss.tchncs.de
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              5
              ·
              1 year ago

              Certainly but it will last longer.

              that’s highly debatable if we’re talking about a $600 PC. I mean, yes you can argue that with games on PC you can always figure something out to get acceptable performance, but people in the market to buy a $300 console likely lack the experience, knowledge or time to do that

              • MJBrune@beehaw.org
                link
                fedilink
                English
                arrow-up
                3
                ·
                1 year ago

                You might not be able to play the latest and greatest but you can still play many games and you don’t lose access to them. They are shutting down the Xbox 360 store soon, thus they’ll lose access to any games they don’t have downloaded. I have games on Steam older than time itself that I can still download, even if the publisher has delisted them and stopped them from being sold. I know people who still use laptops from 2005 to play indie games. Essentially pretty soon Xbox 360s are going to turn into disc-only consoles where a 600-dollar computer would never revert to that and people today play on computers from 20 years ago. It’s rare but it certainly happens, especially in the Linux crowd.

                Lastly, you can always upgrade a computer part by part. Which doesn’t require knowledge of how the hardware connects. Just take it to a shop and tell them you want it to run faster for a game and they usually will do some inspections, charge you 100 dollars in labor and then whatever for parts, and get your machine upgraded.

    • lustyargonian@lemm.ee
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      4
      ·
      edit-2
      1 year ago

      If it was a mistake, how the game now coming to Series S proving that? The only thing it proves is that split screen is a demanding feature and MSFT shouldn’t impose parity of that, which they shamelessly accepted after the success of BG3. It’s still a good console to play modern games, of course not at best fidelity, but I don’t think that matters.

      Edit: just realised you’re saying that with an incorrect conclusion that split screen wouldn’t be coming on Series X. Well, that isn’t the case, and probably brings the game to more people with least amount of harm.

    • hypelightfly@kbin.social
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      4
      ·
      edit-2
      1 year ago

      The console itself wasn’t a mistake. Their promises of feature parity was the mistake.

      Not making it have the same amount of RAM was also a mistake, it could have been just a weaker GPU which would have had less issues.

          • soulsource@discuss.tchncs.de
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            1
            ·
            1 year ago

            I was talking about the person(s) at Microsoft, who decided that it’s a good idea to have less RAM on the Series S than on the Series X…

            (And for context: I work in gamedev, and in my experience making games stay within the memory budget is one of the toughest parts of porting games to consoles.)

            • dillekant@slrpnk.net
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              1
              ·
              1 year ago

              who decided that it’s a good idea to have less RAM on the Series S than on the Series X…

              Supply chains are complicated, and MS probably did their due diligence to ensure minimal blockages. From seeing the memory structures of newer video cards, I’m pretty sure there are supply constraints to memory to think of.

              Honestly I think gamedevs leaning on memory this hard instead of compute is a mistake. You can have intelligently tiled, procedurally generated textures and have a lot more of them, but instead everyone is leaning on authored content on disc. This goes against industry trends in non-game rendering where procedural generation is the norm. If Doom Eternal can look that good with forward rendering, there are no excuses.

              My main beef with the hate on the Series S is that both times it’s been a big deal (BG3 and Halo Infinite), it has been split screen which has held back shipping. The community would be as justified going after split screen as they are going after the Series S.

              • soulsource@discuss.tchncs.de
                link
                fedilink
                arrow-up
                2
                ·
                1 year ago

                Tell that to our artists 😉. As a coder I’m all for procedurally generated content. I did replace several heavy textures in our games by procedural materials, to squeeze out a couple of extra MB. However, that’s not the way artists traditionally work. They often don’t have the programming knowledge needed to develop procedural materials on their own, and would need to rely on technical artists or programmers to do so. Drawing a texture however, is very much part of their skillset…

                But yeah, the mention of “squeezing out a couple of MB” brings me to another topic, namely that (at least in our games) the on-disk textures are only part of the RAM usage, and a relativley small one on comparison. In the games I worked on, meshes made up a significantly larger amount of RAM usage. We have several unique assets, which need to fulfill a certain quality standard due to licensing terms, such that in the end we had several dozens of meshes, each over 100 MB, that the player can freely place… Of course there would still be optimization potential on those assets, but as always, there’s a point where further optimization hits diminishing returns… In the end we had to resort to brute-force solutions, like unloading high quality LODs for meshes even if they are relatively close to the player… Not the most beautiful solution, but luckily not often needed during normal gameplay (that is: if the player doesn’t intentioally try to make the game go out-of-memory).

                But I’m rambling. The tl;dr is: The memory constraints would not be a big deal if there was enough time/money for optimization. If there is one thing that’s never enough in game dev, it’s time/money.

                • dillekant@slrpnk.net
                  link
                  fedilink
                  arrow-up
                  1
                  ·
                  1 year ago

                  OK so this is now offtopic for the conversation, but…

                  However, that’s not the way artists traditionally work.

                  To some extent, it’s authoring tools which affect how they work. A procedural materials pipeline can help them compose on top of already procedural content. In a way, you could see PBR as a part of that pipeline because PBR materials are physics modelled. Having said that I do take your point, even building out that pipeline takes time. Creating a PBR materials library is not super easy, and obviously organic stuff is very hard to model as a material.

                  meshes made up a significantly larger amount of RAM usage

                  From watching blender modelling, I thought the pattern was to have minimal rigging on the base mesh and then tesselation via normal maps + subdivision (apparently this is very doable even with sculpting). Obviously for animation you need a certain quality but beyond that I thought everything would be normal maps, reflection maps, etc etc.

  • Nechesh@beehaw.org
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    26
    ·
    1 year ago

    I thought Microsoft was the one requiring feature parity. It sounds like the real story is MS caving.

  • Blackmist@feddit.uk
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    12
    ·
    1 year ago

    The right decision due to how it runs. It’s basically two copies of the game going at once. None of this players not being able to stray too far from each other nonsense like other local co-op games.

  • ram@lemmy.ca
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    9
    ·
    1 year ago

    This is great news. Glad to see Xbox players will get to play this fantastic game!!

  • coyotino [he/him]@beehaw.org
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    5
    ·
    1 year ago

    I remember split-screen being real shaky for D:OS2 on the PS4. Not surprised that they struggled to get it working for this even-more-demanding game on a resource-limited console.