MS really needs to be more powerful to change the mindset of the hardcore gamer. It's literally a must.
-
Ever wanted an RSS feed of all your favorite gaming news sites? Go check out our new Gaming Headlines feed! Read more about it here.
Insider: "Xbox Anaconda aims to be the clearly better performing device" compared to PS5
- Thread starter javiergame4
- Start date
- Status
holy hell, the concept of Microsoft putting a more beastly machine than Sony twice in a row has some people shaken to the core haha.
There's no way Microsoft doesn't make sure they retain their power advantage after controlling the power narrative the last few years as a result of Sony putting out that middling refresh of a device while Microsoft puts out a monster of a console. It would be fiduciary malpractice for them to fail to do so. People forget how utterly important it was to be the most powerful console in 2013 and 2014 and underestimate the desire of casuals to not purchase the weaker machine for their money, just like it was in 2013 and 2014.
There's no way Microsoft doesn't make sure they retain their power advantage after controlling the power narrative the last few years as a result of Sony putting out that middling refresh of a device while Microsoft puts out a monster of a console. It would be fiduciary malpractice for them to fail to do so. People forget how utterly important it was to be the most powerful console in 2013 and 2014 and underestimate the desire of casuals to not purchase the weaker machine for their money, just like it was in 2013 and 2014.
ridiculous post
when they have announced in the last year the acquisitions of like 6 studios.
What do you think the point of all the acquisitions was? Power and content aren't an either/or kind of thing. Microsoft is going for both.
Xbox One was the baseline, so of course the game was held back in that everything needed to be able to run on it. Also I'd like to add that it seems like you're talking graphics only, while I'm not.
Good to see that you have not changed, always way over the top in your replies.
For your second line, 1. PS5 will of course get launch exclusives that need not run on PS4, so your point is moot and 2. The cross-gen games will end at some point where the baseline will become the PS5 and on Xbox side the baseline will continue to be Lockhart for the entire gen.
Last edited:
If XBOX has the latest Fifa and COD marketing deals, which is a huge deal here in Europe, I can see them getting some momentum.
There were devkits before PS4 reveal and nobody knew about the 8GB GDDR. There will be surprises without a doubt. That's why we shouldn't jump to conclusions yet.
I take it, your post is meant ironically? If yes, sure if you want to ruin your company by fucking with one of your (if not the) most important customers by unmotivatedly signing such a dubios contract, sure you can absolutly do that.
I'm not surprised that Microsoft wants to aim higher than the PS5.
Should be interesting when these new consoles launch.
Should be interesting when these new consoles launch.
At this point it's only "tweaking". Last gen RAM and clock speed were the only changes we saw. No reason to believe a major change is possible this close to release.
people really serious about amd purposely giving microsoft all the details on sony's custom specs to guarantee that they get a more powerful product via some under the table gentleman's agreement? lol
You're telling me the Xbox One was holding RDR2 back? Yikes. It wasn't even the target platform according to DF. Scalability is a thing, if you didn't realise.
I personally don't think the existence of a cheaper model gives them free reign to go expensive with Anaconda. All that will happen is people will see the PS5 as a fair compromise of capability and affordability.
Anaconda should be the same price as PS5.
Specs mean nothing if there's no software to support it.
You can have the biggest most badass rig ever made, but if the only thing that's on it is solitare and minesweeper, it defeats the purpose.
Microsoft doesn't need powerful hardware, it needs powerful software, something that Sony is currently the king of.
You can have the biggest most badass rig ever made, but if the only thing that's on it is solitare and minesweeper, it defeats the purpose.
Microsoft doesn't need powerful hardware, it needs powerful software, something that Sony is currently the king of.
I feel like Microsoft got so hooked up on the power difference early in the gen that they didn't notice Sony pumping out must play games left and right. Having a powerful console is nice, but what is showing off that power needs to be fun and engaging. I hope all those studios MS gobbled up will deliver on that front. I also want to see Xbox become the place for VR games because that is where my focus is right now and Sony is nailing those exclusives too.
The power advantage was only important back then because the Xbox one was more expensive and weaker. Your going to stand out if your system is weaker and cost more. Look at the PS3, the system cost $599 at launch, and its games either looked the same or worse, than a system that cost only $299/$399. Its a bad look for anyone when that happens. At the same price point those systems wont be any different, if one is more powerful, then its because one is more expensive, or comes out 6 months to a year latter.
Early in the gen Sony wasn't pumping out games left and right lol
First big one (for me at least) was Bloodborne
See my edit for another detail. Also I'm a computer science graduate, so you don't need to talk down to me with tech.
So CPU clock cycles don't matter for things like game logic, physics, NPC density, etc.? It's all about graphical assets scalability? News to me.
The game would be the exact same if PS5/Anaconda were the baseline?
That's why I said, Xbox got hooked up on the power difference early in the gen because that is where the focus was. People were picking apart differences in even the most mediocre games like Thief 2014. Then MS came out swinging with the Xbox One X and they had failed to notice that people cared more about the games Sony was pushing out, having the most powerful console on the planet was pointless. I never claimed Sony had a stellar start.
I just find it amusing that yourself and others seem to know exactly what devs want and what they don't, what they can do and what they cant.
I don't think they can afford to launch more expensive than Sony. Doesn't matter if they have a less expensive, mostly streaming device alternative. They must be prepared to eat the cost otherwise don't bother.
A developer will always want the highest possibly baseline, I can guarantee you that. My post was that and nothing more, but you taking the condescending route is not new.
Great hardware is fine. Quality games are a must and may be as bold to state, a given. The real interest and proverbial "trick up thy sleeve" is the services and system software. Will the dashboards be the same? Is streaming a focus? Are subscriptions a focus? Do the free game programs continue? How is BC handled? How will game libraries be handled? How does account management, profiles, social gaming, and security evolve?
Why are people seriously thinking AMD would violate business contracts and open themselves up for costly lawsuits and loss of business due to them developing a reputation of being untrustworthy with sensitive business information? I know next-gen talk brings in the fanboyism, but think a little bit at least.
Are you purposely acting dumb? Read my last post before that one and you can see I said it will only make a difference if there were drastic changes to the hardware to the point it's a whole different arch. If the low end Xbox is simply a lower clocked version with maybe a few less CU then it won't have a noticeable difference maybe aside from resolution. It might be dynamic 4K compared to native 4K on the high end Xbox. It's not like you're saying where devs will have to throw out all their plans because they have to develop around some super weak PS2 tier console or whatever you're trying to claim.
Here is the question. What if both box has the same SPEC's...I mean they both invest into the same company for hardware and unless MS wants to bleed $$$ at the start of launch by $150-200, I think both consoles will have the same specs with a hardware loss of under $100 for the first year.
I was replying to you saying this.
You're talking about devs being shackled and we don't even know what the specs are yet, lol.
I'm not acting dumb, but I need to ask in that way because you continued to reply to me saying that I don't understand anything, while I'm fairly sure that I do. And see, that's the thing. You talk about things you can notice, but would you have known that Spider-Man's max swinging speed was a direct constraint of the PS4 tech rather than a conscious game design decision, if Mark Cerny had not told us? You and me will maybe not notice anything with a lower Lockhart baseline, but the developers certainly will.
Last edited:
They had FIFA most of this gen, even fully exclusive FUT Legend cards. It did nothing. Footy and PlayStation are pretty much inseparable at this point thanks to Champions League sponsorship.
For the third time I'll say it: It will only matter if there's drastic differences in hardware. As far as we know right now both consoles will be identical in their support and will both have SSD (so no major constrains like you're trying to make out there will be). You're exaggerating how much of a constraint the lower end console will be. I'm willing to bet the biggest difference between the two will be resolution, and all else being equal, with the devs still managing to get the best out of the higher end Xbox hardware. Feel free to screencap this and tell me I'm wrong if that isn't the case and that the low end Xbox held the high end one back so much it's almost a useless purchase.
Read my first reply again won't you. I clearly said if you got a PC able to run the games.
TBH, I'm not sure they'd be trailing in the US (or at least, not by much) if they'd held on to the COD marketing rights. That Black Ops bundle was a massive win for Sony, and COD bundles have continued to be system sellers for the PS4.
The FIFA deal wasn't as effective, because Europe.
What's your point? That changed dramatically for them and that's kind of Parr for every new system release isn't it?
Nintendo? Lol
You're talking about a PS4 game running on PS5 hardware. The difference between base and high end on Xbox next gen isnt going to be the same difference at all.
I know my language was harsh when I asked if he was acting dumb, but I honestly think he's purposely creating a false reality for whatever reason. I think we should just move on from this. Put people in ignore lists and carry on the conversation without it getting too heated.
You chose to argue my point that the Xbox is for console gamers by bringing up a tired old argument that if you have a PC, you don't need an Xbox. Where does that fit in with my point that the Xbox is targeting console gamers? The PC isn't even a consideration for people who want to only game on consoles.
- Status