My console manufacturer can beat up your console manufacturer
so there :P
(I agree with you btw)
-
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.
-
We have made minor adjustments to how the search bar works on ResetEra. You can read about the changes here.
Windows Central: "At launch, we've heard there won't be any "Xbox Scarlett"-exclusive games. For at least a few years (cont-)" [Update in OP]
- Thread starter Nightengale
- Start date
so there :P
(I agree with you btw)
I think it is flawed to assume that the Xbox One X will hold back say Playground's Fable any more than the need for Medium or low settings held back the max setting of Crysis...
But maybe I'm wrong.
Ok after rereading the op for the umpteenth time
does this mean that because this "Game Core" wont be finished that game would be cross gen cause they can be but once Game Core is finished they wont be because older xbox support isnt in Game Core.
So based on this rumor Microsoft is launching a half baked system? I cant see them trying this shit after the Xbone prelaunch and launch debacle.
This seems so fucked up E3 cant come soon enough
---------
This seems like such a fucking mess to report on that it shouldn't of been without some actual facts to it, like I said Telephone with too many people in the chain.
EDIT
I feel this would mean the whole story here is invalid. If you were going to do this why not a majority of your projects be this way. With then only having a couple crossgen games, like buying a bunch of studios gearing up for next gen development then saying OH but you need to design around 7yr old CPU and RAM limitations is absolutely insane.
does this mean that because this "Game Core" wont be finished that game would be cross gen cause they can be but once Game Core is finished they wont be because older xbox support isnt in Game Core.
So based on this rumor Microsoft is launching a half baked system? I cant see them trying this shit after the Xbone prelaunch and launch debacle.
This seems so fucked up E3 cant come soon enough
---------
This seems like such a fucking mess to report on that it shouldn't of been without some actual facts to it, like I said Telephone with too many people in the chain.
EDIT
I feel this would mean the whole story here is invalid. If you were going to do this why not a majority of your projects be this way. With then only having a couple crossgen games, like buying a bunch of studios gearing up for next gen development then saying OH but you need to design around 7yr old CPU and RAM limitations is absolutely insane.
Last edited:
What about OG and the S? Cause in this scenario there still supported. And yes game design is affected by the baseline. See Watchdogs, Assassin's Creed Unity before the downgrades.
I just want games built for the new, powerful hardware. But sure, turn this into a fanboy thing.
They might be able to show up with that, still. It really does take just one. See: sonic the hedgehog (not launch but megadrive languished for 1 year until sonic), mario64, halo. 1 game can be enough to thouroughly demonstrate the new system. Making it clear that its better than your old system.
Sure but the rest of the 64 launch games did not look like SNES Games and The Xbox launch games did not look like n64 games.
Hell even Dreamcast launch games that were ports looked better then the versions they were based on like MK Gold and Soul Calibur
In the AAA space maybe, in terms of derisking. But within the rules laid down by the market, more power will still let those devs do more, and more easily. Arguably, effectively helping to derisk more creative experiments within the commercial parameters they have to work with. If they can execute something in one week instead of three it leaves time and budget for 'more'. Insomniac spent nearly a month on one loading cutscene in Spider-Man, partially at least because of power constraints. Maybe I'm optimistic but I think if they could have cut down that time spent on stuff like the it might make a dev more confident to try things out and experiment.
This is doubly true for smaller devs. It's no coincidence that the indie explosion happened when it did.
More power makes it easier for small devs to do more things in less time and budget. There's less need to optimize. They can pull off things that on the prior gen were within reach of AAAs only.
Things that might need weeks or months to pull off on a prior generation of hardware can become trivial in a new generation.
In the hypothetical scenario where devs are held to the current generation of cpu, it would, for small devs at least, put a hold on the efficiencies of power that indies have been rocketing along for the last 5-10 years.
Last edited:
They got shit for lack of first party support for the second half of the 360 life, they're getting shit for lack of first party on Xbox. They can't roll up with a couple of exclusive games and go 'ok we're good'
Unless you mean solely for the launch window then ok
Of course, if MS is all about the MAUs now, and play anywhere - the actual technology is arguably less important to them. Why throw away the existing millions of users if you then to keep gamepass subs etc. And you're still delivering your games to PCs too. They could simply be going for a different model where they don't feel the need to push the tech and Scarlett is just one option for consumers alongside a gaming pc or a tablet for streaming
For sure, that is all anyone really expects. For any new console, no one really think it would have multiple system sellers in the first year. Even Nintendo couldn't manage it.
There is always a chance that what we are hearing was wrong or misinterpreted. But consider the number of people defending the hypothetical chance that Scarlet would launch without exclusives, I am inclined to counter the argument.
Once again, are you making an argument that Microsoft is going to spend all that money releasing two next gen SKUs, and yet NOT give it maximum support?
Do you think Scarlet's release pay for itself? Do you realize that a console's release is a massive drain on a company's resources, and that any neglegence on the part of the launch could delay a return to profitability? At this point you seem to think Scarlet is irrelevant and is allowed to fail, which is nonsense.
Im imagining a modest leap from x1x>scarlet in the cross gen games but can't be sure. Theres a chance the games could look/run sufficiently better so to be obvious without a digital foundry analysis.
Raytracing turned on plus a high fps mode and short load times would probably be sufficient. Its still not going to look like a true next gen game but hopefully wouldn't look and feel last gen.
It the improvements aren't that exciting or noticeable then that might as well be a last gen game, yeah. Im sure we can expect some games to have great enhancements and some to be weak.
This is good. It's all about options, that seems Microsoft's mantra. It's like playing PC games on a low-end machine: you can still do it, it just won't be anywhere near as great as with the expensive new tech.
100% disagree
Even then you are still being held back at CPU and RAM limitations
Did SSX come out for PS1?
Was killzone shadowfall on PS3?
I must have missed those. Drat!
On one hand, this is something I expect MS would do considering where they're headed gaming wise. On the other, I just don't see them not releasing exclusives for Scarlett to show off next gen capabilities.
In any case, this is just speculation. Not about to twiddle my thumbs over it till MS confirms it themselves.
In any case, this is just speculation. Not about to twiddle my thumbs over it till MS confirms it themselves.
Yeah theyre held back but doesn't that sound like notable improvements for the crossgen games? I think that would be a decent demonstration of the system as an upgrade. Its not going to look like much next to god of war 2, sure.
Its not unlike the early dreamcast games you pointed out. Soul reaver was limited by the psx but the dreamcast one was sufficiently better for average players to tell.
480p and 24 fps. A very cinematic experience. ;-)
Forza Horizon 2 Presents Fast & Furious was the last crossgen title from Microsoft.
OP
OP
If we trust the exact wording in the write-up (which isn't really concrete or clear about the plans, so it could end up being wrong or misunderstood ) , it means that games must run on PC/Scarlett and X1.
Kinda expected, X is a beast and costs a lot of money. Why would any one buy it now if it's not supported in a year?
This is what I'm thinking and with xcloud og xboxes can play the newer Scarlett games as well.
I'm really doubting 1st party games will be cross-gen (though ones that had been in Dev before Scarlett had been announced could be).
That was a forward ported game that was already finished for PS1 and just given new art assets and a resolution bump.
And not to mentioned not from a first party trying to sell you a new console, Sega wouldn't of gotten away selling VF2 on Dreamcast.
Were also in an age of diminishing visual returns
It's a bit different on PC, plus they outsource it, but making games for 7 Console SKU's isn't gonna be fun.
I posted this in the other thread, but i'll post it here too. Could it be that Microsoft is positioning the XBX as the 'Lockhart' console and just launching a single new piece of next-gen hardware in 2020? That would give them a nice spread of hardware options for the price conscious, the middle tier and the enthusiasts alike.
I'd say that makes more sense than having a lineup of XB1S, XBX, XB Lockhart and XB Anaconda all at once and having to support all of them for the coming generation. Lockhart would be in an odd place.
I'd say that makes more sense than having a lineup of XB1S, XBX, XB Lockhart and XB Anaconda all at once and having to support all of them for the coming generation. Lockhart would be in an odd place.
This all sounds awful MS, hoping its just for launch. Would be sad if it becomes a policy and hinders next gen as a whole. Would hate games releasing in 2023+ still being linked in any way to a 2013 console, scalability or not.
Is this linked to how scalability works with UWP?
Is UWP =Game Core with a different name?
Is this linked to how scalability works with UWP?
Is UWP =Game Core with a different name?
I prefer this over cutting the legs of a past gen just to push customers into buying a new console. Move the X/Pro into base line, maybe keep S/Slim as the very base platform but allow the large playerbase to gradually move into new gen without a forceful push that the last gens have done because of arbitrary lines in sand. Adaptive development is happening constantly in today's game industry, especially with GaaS titles and soon-to-be streaming platforms, so this unity isn't some boogieman.
You'll still get your pretty games if you so choose, it is just that with the support of more consoles it means more people get access to great games. Want the bells and whistles? Get an Xbox Scarlett or if Sony does it as well the PS5. Got a Xbone/PS4? No problem, enjoy these games and have fun. We'll see it with Last of Us 2, Death Stranding, Ghosts and more as devs capitalise on multi-platform playerbases that can provide all sources of income rather than small chunks from new gens slowly growing.
Heck adoption rates for this gen were great but not a boom instant breakthrough so I definitely see no reason for this to be a "bad" choice by Microsoft.
You'll still get your pretty games if you so choose, it is just that with the support of more consoles it means more people get access to great games. Want the bells and whistles? Get an Xbox Scarlett or if Sony does it as well the PS5. Got a Xbone/PS4? No problem, enjoy these games and have fun. We'll see it with Last of Us 2, Death Stranding, Ghosts and more as devs capitalise on multi-platform playerbases that can provide all sources of income rather than small chunks from new gens slowly growing.
Heck adoption rates for this gen were great but not a boom instant breakthrough so I definitely see no reason for this to be a "bad" choice by Microsoft.
You're absolutely correct about smaller devs, but the advancement in tech also leads to the same type of arms race as big devs in an effort to look "modern" enough to stand out among the immense crowd of indie studios.
I'm not trying to argue that new hardware is bad for software development, that's ridiculous. Im just saying the expectations the industry has built up for new hardware and the perception of how games need to keep getting more and more photoreal, all that absolutely is harmful for creativity.
It's not a problem with a simple solution, and even if the initial rumor here turns out to be totally accurate I doubt it would do anything to help stop or slow the cycle.
Im just saying, the idea that "progress" and "advancement" automatically inherently equal something good isnt realistic.
a terrible move from microsoft, no reason to adopt the new xbox when the game run on X1, and sony will push first party exclusivity with full potential of the future PS, the first party xbox will look terrible in front, not only on the graphical side, but on every other side where the CPU and SSD will benefit.
No troll, but why buy a scarlett ? the third party really next gen will be available on PS5 too, and the sony first party will blow away the microsoft first party on every side. The war is already over.
No troll, but why buy a scarlett ? the third party really next gen will be available on PS5 too, and the sony first party will blow away the microsoft first party on every side. The war is already over.
Making pretty much anything "mandatory" would be a big mistake, but thats not happening. However making it a realistic goal for every game is excellent. I feel like people ignore the fact that Microsoft is already very much committed to a wide range of specs since their games will release on both PC and console. The best and worst version of all games should still be the PC version depending on your hardware.
And an honest question what do you think was the first game this gen that could not have run on a 360/PS3? Before you answer please remember that GTA V is a last gen game.
And an honest question what do you think was the first game this gen that could not have run on a 360/PS3? Before you answer please remember that GTA V is a last gen game.
Normally, I would reassure you that there is no way MS would actually do this. That it is likely some sort of miscommunication and that all will be well. Ms will release at least one Scarlet Launch Exclusive to showcase what the machine could do.
But I used to also believe that MS was insane to release two SKUs for next gen, and that there was no way MS would actually waste effort releasing their hardware in such a way.
So i don't know anymore. A company who is willing to release two different SKUs for next gen, is capable of anything.
Do people really believe this
I can't fathom some of the stuff being said in this thread
Actually i have only a PS4, and i had big hope for microsoft to put a real competitor on the market for push sony to stop their arrogant position. Now my hope are very decrease.
i think too release game with so much segmentation in quality ( X1 OG / X1X / X scarlett / PC ) it's a bad move.
The problem is that the potato CPU of the current gen consoles as a baseline limits what you can do in future games. I would be completely dissapointed
if we're not seeing any advancements in physics + AI next gen. This gen is fantastic, but it's hardly "next-gen" in all departments but graphics if you think about it.
Yes, a game that is solely developed for a next-gen platform is going to look different and will have different features than a game that has to take the ~8-year old XB1 into account.
I think this rumor is BS btw
If you think there will be enourmous differences in graphics between the two consoles for exclusives then I'm genuinely flabbergasted
Well normally there wouldn't. But if, (and it's a big if) MS decided that their own exclusive has to run on a standard Xbox One, then their Scarlet game is going to have a massive disadvantage compared to Sony's own PS5 exclusive offerings.
This is something that never happened before, so there is no chance we could have anything historical to compare it to. But as everyone keep saying, it could just be a false rumor or mistake in info. So don't lose sleep over it just yet.
I'm genuinely flabbergasted that you don't understand that this is about much more than graphics...
The danger of this strategy is of course, that Sony could make an exclusive ray tracing game running at 1080p/30fps on PS5, which would easily look a generation ahead of what Microsoft could do on Xbox.
Because Microsoft's strategy seems to be based around Anaconda being a 4K console. So a 1080p game on Anaconda isn't really feasible:
Anaconda: 1080p
Lockhart / Xbox One X: 720p
Xbox One: 360p
And even if Microsoft will someday end XO support, their next-gen platform would still be held back by Lockhart in this regard.
Edit: And this doesn't even consider the differences regarding CPU power, which could make certain games impossible on Xbox.
Because Microsoft's strategy seems to be based around Anaconda being a 4K console. So a 1080p game on Anaconda isn't really feasible:
Anaconda: 1080p
Lockhart / Xbox One X: 720p
Xbox One: 360p
And even if Microsoft will someday end XO support, their next-gen platform would still be held back by Lockhart in this regard.
Edit: And this doesn't even consider the differences regarding CPU power, which could make certain games impossible on Xbox.
I think you need to temper your expectations of early next gen games.
My argument is that pretty much anything can scale to a degree from resolution to physics and AI. It should not be mandated since games could use something like advanced physics as a core concept, but in general pretty much any game made this generation could have been a last generation game if toned down enough. The same will be true next gen - no matter how many Xbox first party games runs on Xbox One. How long it is worth having the goal of running on Xbox One would obviously depends on where people play the games.
If you think there won't be enormous differences between games developed with next gen as base or current gen as base I'm genuinely flabbergasted.
Yes maybe in textures and some other aspects they can come close but there are so many things like physics, world density, IA, bigger worlds, more NPCs and some any others that just can't be achieved by scalability.
it isn't about mandates. It's that 1st party games have a very specific mission at the start of any generation; to convince gamers to buy a machine to play it.
Further, due to backwards compatibility being present for both sides, third party studios absolutely has no incentive to release next gen titles at their maximum capacity early on. So the only way for a next gen console to showcase itself at launch, is from 1st party games that are intentionally made to "show off".
So to not have Scarlet exclusives at launch, if true, would hamstring Microsoft's ability to market their console.
Now, for many posts i have been arguing with some here who believe that this is fine, that Microsoft doesn't need Scarlet to succeed and that next gen console isn't important anyway. I am not sure that person is for real or trolling, but at some point it doesn't matter.
And it bears repeating that this could all end up being just a badly written article using rumor that end up being misinterpreted. But none the less we are a forum and discussions are fun.
Launching two new boxes that only play what the two old boxes can play sounds like a death sentence. Why would the average consumer adopt the new consoles when they don't need them to play the latest games? Cross gen titles are a fine stopgap but exclusive titles are essential to the success of a new console. And having no games to set them apart, ESPECIALLY when the competition is launching a new console in the same window, sounds asinine.
It depends on what you expect from games.
for example: I would love to see a Just Cause 5 that doesn't run like shit on consoles limited by their CPU and HD-streaming-capabilities with even more destruction added. Just Cause 3 + 4 were painfully limited by the constraints of multi-plattform development and using current gen consoles as a baseline. There is nothing to "scale" here. A PS2 wouldn't be able to handle the physics of such a game even if you scale the graphic back to PS1 levels.