one is generational based, the other is blurring generations.
Post Xbox One Two Scorpio, what should Sony do next? *spawn* (oh, and Nintendo?)
- Thread starter mpg1
- Start date
Every time I have seen someone at Microsoft contextualize what they mean by the "end of generations" they tout the benefits of backwards compatibility but they have only ever mentioned forward compatibility between Xbox One and Scorpio. Can anyone find me a quote from someone at Microsoft where they specifically indicate that forward compatibility is going to continue past XBOne -> Scorpio.
Last edited:
Except their message have never said so explicitly. Most of what we expect is implied and extrapolated. It's impossible to figure out what MS want to do unless we cherry pick statements.
Scorpio message:
- There's no more generations, this is a new era.
- Design goal was established by asking devs what specs would allow the exact same game to run in 4K.
- No exclusives will be allowed on scorpio. Ohana means family. Family means nobody gets left behind.
- If you don't have a 4K TV, get the XB1 because there will be no advantages with scorpio.
- Scorpio has BC with XB1 games and accessories.
- They have no idea what they'll do after Scorpio. Not yet decided. They are looking at "consumer trends"
- Scorpio is part of the Xbox One family and games will run on both systems. (except VR)
- They don't want a new console every 2 years. (wasn't the question, what about 3-4 years?)
- Devs are free to do what they want to exploit the higher specs. (but... he said earlier...)
Nothing they said supports their PR fluff "no more generations". Nothing is different from PS4 Pro business model so far. Never mentioned nor implied FC for future hardware. They haven't decided.
PS4 Pro message:
- Generations and fixed hardware are a good thing.
- Pro is the same generation, same disc, no exclusives.
- Pro is just a high-end version of the PS4.
- Devs are free to do what they want to exploit the higher specs.
- Not decided yet what the PS5 will be.
Any perceived different right now is just PR fluff around the edges. The practical implications of their mid-gen offering are the same.
Even if one's never found, it's what a lot of us are expecting given MS's direction - not only FC with XBN, but also cross-play on PC and mobile, such that XBox becomes as much a software platform as hardware. Buy a game on an XBox capable device and play it on any other XBox device you own (or are logged in to?).
I suppose spelling it out like that, there must be a performance level requirement per title, as you can't expect every console and PC game to run on every Windows mobile device. At which point CPU capability becomes moot and we'll just have games targeting XBN's CPU being unplayable on Scorpio, while some other games may run on both.
I suppose spelling it out like that, there must be a performance level requirement per title, as you can't expect every console and PC game to run on every Windows mobile device. At which point CPU capability becomes moot and we'll just have games targeting XBN's CPU being unplayable on Scorpio, while some other games may run on both.
Backwards compatibility has a lot of utility IMO, forward compatibility for me anyways is less important. What MS is doing with BC makes it much tougher for someone to justify abandoning the XBOX platform for competitors. How much the feature actually gets used is another matter but for me, I can say if I had known in the 360/PS3 era much of the titles I wanted to play were going to work on future MS consoles I would have invested more of my purchases on Microsoft's platform.
It's possible Sony offers decent backward compatibility for PS4 titles once PS5 is released but I honestly doubt they really thought that far ahead and may want to try and resell much of that software as they've already done with PS4 and earlier PlayStation titles.
I'm also curious about possible bottlenecks forward compatibility might introduce with future titles. Would enemy AI or numbers be compromised? What about level size, the amount of streaming of assets in and to some degree compromising immersion due to loading might be introduced?
It's possible Sony offers decent backward compatibility for PS4 titles once PS5 is released but I honestly doubt they really thought that far ahead and may want to try and resell much of that software as they've already done with PS4 and earlier PlayStation titles.
I'm also curious about possible bottlenecks forward compatibility might introduce with future titles. Would enemy AI or numbers be compromised? What about level size, the amount of streaming of assets in and to some degree compromising immersion due to loading might be introduced?
Last edited:
I think, eventually, it would be best for Microsoft to leave it up to the developers/publishers to determine what platforms to support and how they want to support them and to give them as many options as possible to do so. Whether it's one build that scales, or different builds for different platforms with differing feature sets according to hardware capability, or some combination of the two. And if a game cannot be realized on a platform, the developer should not be forced to compromise their vision to make that version happen.
This gen was a special case where the expectations of early adopters were already being subverted by the mere existence of the mid-gen upgrades. Guaranteed support and feature parity (per the Sony requirements) are a bone that the platform holders are throwing to these early adopters so they maybe don't feel that they are being completely screwed over. After this? I think that obligation is satisfied.
It's absolutely got differences. MS have the PC and Windows, Sony don't. Sony aren't developing their games for the constantly evolving PC platform and selling them on their Windows integrated universal app storefront.
Nothing MS have done so far indicates that the software death of Scoprio will be tied to the software death of the X1, and the core capabilities of the Scoprio already go beyond the X1 in a way which the PS4Pro's don't (wrt PS4 OG). It'll be a viable PC port machine for many years to come, and for many years longer than the X1. At least, it will if it's not lumbered with Jaguar again (which was cool for 2013, but not particularly 2017).
Just looking at PC as a historical for this type of behaviour, it doesn't seem to be really any different. The developers set a goal in mind, that becomes the target spec and the the game runs on said spec.
Usually the spec chosen will be based upon the largest marketshare in terms of configurations (so RAM, CPU, GPU and GPU RAM), they'll figure out their min/recommended and go from there.
That being said, for X1 and Scorpio, all they need is the go ahead from MS that they are allowed to spec for Scorpio. But you wouldn't want to spec for Scorpio, unless its audience was larger than X1. I think from a business decision, when MS sees the audience has moved beyond X1, they will let developers spec for Scorpio. And when I think about MS' strategy, they may even make that happen sooner rather than later, since their business objectives are to migrate and sell as much software through their store, you don't want games being spec'd for XBO, when you're attempting to transition users over from Win 7 to W10. You're gonna want your exclusives to be big time sellers in the PC space to force the migration, and that will only happen if the specs move up.
That being said, Scorpio could very well be waiting on key DX12_1_2 based features that haven't been seen on AMD GPUs yet, which might be the extra year wait. I'm sure it would be a giant mis-step by MS to release Scorpio as only FL12_0.
As Per BC. As a guy coming from PC, I really do appreciate it. One thing that few people have mentioned, or I haven't seen mentioned often, is that with BC, I'm looking at a completed library. Like I already know what games I want to play, I already have all the reviews, all the expansions and DLCs to fix the game is done. The games are being presented to me in the best possible state (ignoring MP games).
That's a big selling point. Instead of buying new hardware and hoping for a game to take full advantage of it, you're actually looking backwards with that 20/20 hindsight and cherry picking all the titles that actually accomplished it.
That's something where, should Sony put PS3 BC on PS4, I think I would cave in. And If PS5 doesn't support it, there's just no way I'd buy in ever. There's just too many games on PS3, PS4 that I would have missed. I don't want to sloppy spend money everywhere hoping to justify my purchase, I'd actually much have all my games and purchases in mind and then go for the plunge (if I had to choose a secondary system).
edit: what tends to come to screen often on both Reddit and NeoGaf is: "I just got X console, what games should I get for it"
And the response is like 4-8 exclusives. Usually, maybe less.
it's not a lot when you think about it. But you alter the question to, I got X console what BC games should I get on it, and people are going to recurse this massive library of 8 years and you're going to get a ton of options.
Last edited:
I bought Pro to get better performance from PS4 games now and after PS5 release. Unlike last generations I will not buy a new console at launch and will wait until some interesting games appear which can take one or two years. Pro will help me with the wait.
MS also have a Play Anywhere initiative.
Yep, that too!
MS only launched it a few months ago. It's something they're planning to grow, along with universal apps.
A Vita build will be significantly different to a build that pushes the PS4. Vita games don't leverage high end PS4 assets and effects in the same way Scorpio is planned to take advantage of higher end PC enhancements.
Also, Vita is dead. PC gaming is still growing.
A Vita build will be significantly different to a build that pushes the PS4. Vita games don't leverage high end PS4 assets and effects in the same way Scorpio is planned to take advantage of higher end PC enhancements.
Also, Vita is dead. PC gaming is still growing.
But the master race is surprisingly vocal and whilst this initiative may not benefit many it helps appease many and really assists with the issue of Xbox or PC, especially when most Xbox IP ends up on PC anyway.
I think this is a reason not to jump to PC, its letting you go of but keeping you with xbox rather than allowing PlayStation to tempt as your console counterpart.
If thoes using this is small then the cost to Microsoft is tiny for such a nice little bit of strategic PR.
Play Anywhere can be bigger than just the percentage of peope who want to game on both their xbox and PC. What if you prefer console games but all your friends are PC users, both can buy the game and cross play. Likewise what if you have always been a PC user but gotten tired and just want a console? Or vice versa, your digital purchases will come with you regardless of format. MS is clearly moving towards this unified platform where it doesnt matter wich format you use, the software will be there
Sony by the looks of things are sticking with traditional consoles, PS5 will probably blow us away graphically but there is a fair chance PS4 games wont be playable. They could sort it out if they wanted but they have already conditioned their users that digital purchases are specific for the console, like PS3 games you own are still there but only playable on your PS3. Also their software dark magic is not as good as MS, you can tell by the few PS2 games they released for PS4, and for the PS3 they used expensive hardware that was not cost effective
Sony by the looks of things are sticking with traditional consoles, PS5 will probably blow us away graphically but there is a fair chance PS4 games wont be playable. They could sort it out if they wanted but they have already conditioned their users that digital purchases are specific for the console, like PS3 games you own are still there but only playable on your PS3. Also their software dark magic is not as good as MS, you can tell by the few PS2 games they released for PS4, and for the PS3 they used expensive hardware that was not cost effective
Rikimaru
Veteran
Grow like Windows Store, Windows Phone, GFWL, Zune, Bing, etc.
Do I need to remind that it is limited to MS games? And MS does not make a lot?
I doubt other publishers will make same offer.
Activision does not even support crossplay between Steam and Windows Store versions.
You think MS are intending for universal apps and cross play to fail? You think they're going into this going "hey, lets have another Zune"?
You think that past failures mean a business shouldn't try new things in the future?
What point are you actually trying to get across here?
Mylo, Aibo, Betamax, Vaio, PSP Go, Evilla. Microsoft is not the only company in the world to fail sometimes
Why would Activision support crossplay between Steam and WS? Its a PC, you can buy it from whatever store you want. And that is probably where your friends bought it
Publishers would support it as long as it doesnt compete with their own stores. The more players that play their game online the better, why would that somehow be a negative?
That's a poor argument and you know it. One could just as easily put together a list of all of MS's successes and try to use it to show how Play Anywhere can't possibly fail and that would be just as invalid.
There are, in fact, a few non-MS Play Anywhere games already. It's not the most impressive list but, as function pointed out, it's early days. The technical problems with UWP on the PC are an obstacle here, but they will get worked out in time. I also expect MS will use start using co-marketing deals to entice 3rd parties to make some more significant Play Anywhere titles available.
Rikimaru
Veteran
That's what I'm talking about. Steam and Windows Store COD have different online pool.
You can not play with each other.
Similar threads
