Maybe it will just run at 480p. Although that would not impress.
Yeah, having HDMI in is a differentiator, but I can’t imagine many people are actually using it. Just load up all the cord-cutter apps and be done with it. Much simpler.
Look at a totally modern PC game, like Far Cry 5. If we define playable as 30fps, Far Cry 5 is playable at 1080p ultra quality on a GTX1050, which is equivalent to a GTX960, or a GTX770, or GTX680. The GTX680 was the flagship card of its day-- March 2012. Six years later and it plays a brand-new mid-2018 game at ultra quality.
Now if you go a step further back to the GTX580, that’s equivalent to the GTX950, which also will get around 30fps, but the 1% low is only 27fps.
And remember, all thse tests are on ultra. If you drop it to high or medium, you get a ton of frames back.
Yeah, this is the main reason why I don’t want there to be forward compatibility. Right now the CPU bottleneck on consoles means that even most PC games don’t use the CPU much. I really do think if there’s a clean break, everyone will try to use that CPU headspace again. But if they keep forward compatibility, big game companies in the AAA space will say, you know what, that feature is only possible on the latest generation, that would limit our install base too much, cut that feature, we don’t need it. We’re not going to spend so many man hours just for a feature that will only work on a smaller install base.
Except it’s never worked that way, and developers always want to make their games look amazing even if most people can’t play them yet, due to the halo effect.
It’s unclear what types of experiences more CPU juice would enable, better AI certainly, but the secret shameful truth is most people don’t really want to play against strong AI. Remember Quake bots were extremely good back in the day, and that was 20 years ago.
Anyway, if they come up with new exciting gameplay that really uses all that CPU power, that would be a system-seller.
Whatchyoutalkinbout Willis? Quake bots were terrible. Unreal Tournament bots were excellent. Quake bots just always won. That’s not good AI. That’s just being very accurate. Unreal Tournament bots actually made the same mistake as humans, and had various skills for different characters, like humans. I even remember there was one particular named bot in every match who was my nemesis. Quake bots were just good at killing you, which is stupid.
I think it’s theoretically possible that a developer will come up with a game that must utilize all 16 (or however many) super fast cores on Scarlet and couldn’t be reduced in quality if it only gets 8 cores.
I have my doubts, considering that most devs are still working on a single core, as well as the entire history of gaming that has generally been led by graphical improvements at the high end.
But anyway, if this theoretical dev comes up with this amazing physics or AI based game that requires the full power of an Xbox Scarlet, fine, no forwards compatibility for that game.
But I highly doubt that Microsoft would not allow it in any way.
And yes, I recognize that this means there would need to be some explanation. A burst on the cover that says “Also compatible with Xbox One!” for games that are would generally suffice IMO.
Nah, there were plenty of Quake bots that could play poorly, in idiosyncratic ways similar to players. Same as Unreal. There was a pretty wide ecosystem in bots for awhile there before everybody essentially simultaneously realized they hated playing against bots.
Are you talking about mods? I never tried those. I was talking about the bots that shipped with Quake 3 vs the bots that shipped with Unreal Tournament. I never played UT against humans. The bots were soooo good and so fun to play against. I only played Q3 against humans, because the bots that shipped with the game sucked.
Yeah, I was mostly thinking of physics when I was thinking of extra CPU headspace. That’s something that would be hard to pare back for an inferior CPU version of the Xbox, if you rely on that more complex physics for your basic gameplay, like for a theoretical Red Faction Guerrilla sequel or something.
Oh I was talking original Quake, you’re 2 generations ahead! And yes, they were user-created bots.
I would love for that to happen. I’ve constantly been disappointed with the fact that the first thing devs do with massive increases in power is to increase texture size and pixel count. I mean that’s good, but where are the amazing boosts to AI and physics?
I mean here we are in 2018 and a demo where leaves on the ground react to the two players on screen is blowing people away. But it looks insane, so that’s fine.
PlayStation Now has been providing it for years. It has a library of 650+ games and you can subscribe for one year for $99.
Many game play fine via streaming. If you are super sensitive to lag, or compression artifacting you may not be satisfied, but it’s sufficient for lots of people I’d wager. The biggest challenge is the consistency of your network connection as spikes in lag from your ISP or wifi will be detrimental.
Personally I would not expect the new Xbox generation in 2019. Phil Spencer’s speech at the end of their conference essentially promised they will have a hardware power advantage in perpetuity and that is difficult to achieve launching before the next PlayStation not knowing what they have achieved.
My expectation is both will use Ryzen based tech, Microsoft is going to use GDDR6 in a unified memory setup. I think Sony may have a more customized GPU and use HBM2/3 memory, possibly just for VRAM, with a large pool of DDR4 as system memory managed by AMD’s HBCC. Microsoft will adjust their clock targets as late as possible like they did with the Xbox One.
Red herring. “Ultra quality” is horseshit, a ton of computational expense for stuff most people won’t even be able to see. “High quality” is the proper benchmark. Ultra = e-peen wankery = THIS ONE GOES TO ELEVEN
Yeah, I feel like I addressed that in my post.
Then I can tell you unequivocally that 1080 Ti is plenty good for 4K in modern games on high settings at 60fps. There is not a lot of headroom, you won’t be getting to 120fps constant any time soon at that res, but it fits.
None of this matters because there is no way in holy hell a 1080 Ti level of performance is shipping in any console in 2019. And 2020 is still a bit of a stretch in my book.
Next gen most consoles will employ checkerboarding, temporal injection and even more advanced reconstruction techniques to lessen the flop requirements of games by a large factor at 4K resolutions, just like many games already use on the Pro and XB1X.
Forbes writer with some really interesting things he’s been hearing at E3.
If that’s true, and assuming Sony funneled money into development of Navi, I’d imagine they would have wanted to prohibit its use in a competing console, so the fact that Microsoft reportedly isn’t using it makes sense.
This rumor showed up on a tweet like 10 days ago. I saw it being discussed at Beyond3D. The original tweet was basically trying to blame Sony for the delay of getting Navi to production, but the other perspective is that Sony’s input will likely make the release product better than it would have been without the added time.
After a couple of generations seeing their tech repurposed by partners in competing consoles, I wouldn’t be surprised if the contract with AMD this time was a bit more specific.