No idea but, if the switch does get one of the best looking games this generation (doom etc, 60fps at that), i find it hard to believe that a potentional lockhart will be left out which seems alot closer to the more powerfull machines then the switch is now to the ps4/xbox etc.
The scalability and evolution of game engines *spawn*
- Thread starter ultragpu
- Start date
Well, this is a surprise. Ryan is the biggest Xbox cheerleader.
D
Deleted member 7537
Guest
No, this is nonsense. Is like saying that I can double the speed of my drive by splitting all my files in half.
Doom is 30 on switch though. as might be doom eternal.
I'm not saying from an apples to apples comparison it will be faster but when the game is asking for lower resolution resources to be loaded on Lockhart than it is on PS5, they will be loaded quicker on the relative comparison.
Wait has MS retreated from the "no generations" thing? I thought they were mandating cross-gen support i.e. no XBSX only titles
Within MS own new range it is the half step to the XBSX, no need to discuss Sony and their strategy at all because as it stands they will launch one device and allow PS5 only s/w, MS is launching two devices and preventing devs from saying "XBSS/XBSX only"
They never mandated that for outside studios.
In a later discussion with Phil Spencer, he said how for first party efforts it was up to each individual team to decide on what they wanted to do. The end effect is what we have today. Where they were far enough along in their development to still target current-gen consoles. And their next projects that are still a couple years away from release will be targetting Series X only.
So it may seem like a bit of a spin, where they came up with the no console gamer left behind talking point, but it allegedly wasn't mandated from Microsoft.
On last gen I think they may have had a no One X exclusive, but immediately I can't find any Microsoft direct statements.
But they still appear on the platform, albeit downgraded.
Only for first party studios though?
D
Deleted member 7537
Guest
It’s not faster, it loads low quality assets. It’s like saying my SATA SSD (550MB/s raw) is faster than XBSX SSD at FullHD.
There’s a pretty big gulf in CPU power and the media storage to contend with.
Graphics scaling is somewhat more debatable. Even if Lockhart didn’t exist, there’s still a practical limit to the budget while it’s possible Lockhart just won’t be wholly optimal like how base consoles have gotten the shaft in the wake of the midget twins (particularly performance).
Correct, I didn't say it was faster. I said they may load resources quicker.
Obligatory car analogy:
Two cars racings. Both start at the same time but have different distances to race. Car P can travel at 9 mph. Car L at 4.8 mph. Car P has to race 4 miles. Car L only has to race 1 miles.
Uhm why did this picture look ok on my mobile/Tapatalk, but looks like Godzilla on my browser?
Horrible quality in side view mirrors?
Yeah, its a bit odd, how some things get capped maximum size when it detects mobile use and how the limits are removed when it see desktop mode, despite most tablets or phones running the exact same code as the desktop browser.
As a PC player games are certainly scalable. But if the goal is to keep all the games looking reasonably close to each other, than I would disagree with the sentiment.
unfortunately with the console space, games should look reasonably close together. So It really depends on what they would be willing to concede.
D
Deleted member 7537
Guest
So PS5 and XBS S have the better streaming capabilities:
PS5 10mph/10 miles
XBSS 5mph/5 miles
while the XBSX is the laggard of the race
XBSX 5mph/10 miles
got it. Wow, now I wonder if games will be limited by XBSX inferior streaming capabilities.
Edit: sorry I forgot.
Not much change there then, actually. Even PS2 and Xbox multiplat games where close enough, and the hardware couldn't be further from eachother both in power and architectural differences.
We don't know yet if it will be so much inferior, in special to the claim that games will be 'limited' to the end user.
Yea that makes sense to me. I run a game at 4K30 on my 1070. Or I drop it to 1080p and set everything to low and get 120+ FPS.
No one is saying that on equal settings anything would be faster than PS5 drive speeds. But the bar has been set, PS5 and XSX are 4K consoles, the hardware is being largely leveraged to support that.
MS titles get penalized further for trying to be 60fps by design
Pretty much, yeah, as counter-intuitive as that result may be.
We talking about engine scalability right? That’s the topic of this thread. As in what happens if you scale down or up.So PS5 and XBS S have the better streaming capabilities:
PS5 10mph/10 miles
XBSS 5mph/5 miles
while the XBSX is the laggard of the race
XBSX 5mph/10 miles
got it. Wow, now I wonder if games will be limited by XBSX inferior streaming capabilities.
Edit: sorry I forgot.
Similar threads
