There is no confusing it. Xbox One S just goes by Xbox One in the US. MS quickly discontinued the original Xbox One either when they released the S or shortly after. I haven't seen an original Xbox One sold in a long time. So when the Xbox One X launches, all you can buy will be the Xbox One S and X.
Well, I'm in. I'm sure that the PS4 Pro will be close, just a tad blurrier with some missing details.
After the dumpster fire that was Mass Effect Andromeda you really think Bioware is still capable of making a decent game?
Good point. But they did have issues with ME:A. "Frostbite is wonderful for rendering and lots of things... but one of the key things that makes it really difficult to use is anything related to animation. Because out of the box, it doesn't have an animation system," said one source. Since Frostbite has been primarily used for first-person shooters like Battlefield, Frostbite lacked basic capabilities that BioWare needed like how to handle party systems or track item inventory, leaving BioWare coders to build these mechanics themselves. Despite being a powerful engine, Frostbite just wasn't built to handle the scope of a complete RPG game like Mass Effect. These same problems plagued the development of Dragon Age: Inquisition, but continued in Andromeda. http://www.usgamer.net/articles/the-frostbite-engine-nearly-tanked-mass-effect-andromeda It looks like Frostbite is a horrible RPG engine. And since Anthem looks more like an FPS than an RPG, I'm betting that those problems disappeared.
The thing XBOX needed to do was get more exclusives, whether that be first party or third party, and they didn't manage that. most of the eclusives were timed ones and even then they looked to be Indie titles more than AAA. I was considering getting the scorpio but the price and continued lack of exclusive AAA games has completelty put me off. May as well keep using the PS4 for all the multiplatform stuff and enjoy the better exlcusives the platform has to offer. Was quite funny hearing the Ubisoft guy have to correct himself after he said XBONE.
True. Also, if you have a gaming PC from the last 5 or so years with at least a mid-range card, you can play almost anything on the Xbox One, with better graphics and controls.
That is what's changing with the Xbone X. If you want something that can match that performance that Digital Foundry witnessed, you'll need a GTX 1070. And that card, by itself, runs at least $400. And that's just if you want to match it. To beat it, you'll need a GTX 1080. And it just barely beats it. But if all you want is those PS4 ported Steam games, then a mid to low-range PC will work just fine.
The GPU in the Scorpio/Xbox One X is an RX 580 derivative which is a ~$200 budget card. It in no way compares to the GTX 1070. Sure, in terms of TFLOPs it does. RX 580 is around 6 TFLOPs. But real world performance of the 580 is nowhere near a 1070. Also the 1070 can be had for more like $370 now. Look at the benchmarks in this article if you want to get an idea of how the Xbox One X will peform. 1070 mops the floor with the 580. And that's just what nVidia has out at the moment, and 1070 is just a midrange card. They'll probably have new cards out by the time Scorpio launches. Also 580 is only slightly faster than a 480 which is only slightly faster than a GTX 970 (2014 midrange card). So we aren't talking state of the art hardware here. http://www.anandtech.com/show/11278/amd-radeon-rx-580-rx-570-review
I was just quoting Digital Foundry. If you somehow missed it, here it is again... From what I've seen so far, there is some evidence that Scorpio's true 4K performance could pose a challenge to the likes of Nvidia's GTX 1070 and AMD's Fury X-class hardware. I've seen Microsoft's new console running a Forza Motorsport 6-level experience locked to 4K60 on the equivalent to PC's ultra settings - cranking up the quality presets to obscene levels was one of the first things developer Turn 10 did when confronted with the sheer amount of headroom it had left after a straight Xbox One port. Out of interest, we tested Forza 6 Apex with similar settings at 4K on GTX 1060, 1070 and 1080. Frames were dropped on GTX 1060 (and a lot of them when wet weather conditions kicked in), while GTX 1070 held firm with only the most intense wet weather conditions causing performance dips. Only GTX 1080 held completely solid in all test cases. It's only one data point, and the extent to which the code is comparable at all is debatable, but it certainly doesn't harm Scorpio's credentials: Forza 6 Apex received plenty of praise for the quality of its PC port. http://www.eurogamer.net/articles/d...pio-is-console-hardware-pushed-to-a-new-level They're talking performance and not specs. If specs were the only thing of importance, then an iMac Pro would be the elite gaming machine.
So meaningless hearsay is what you are going by, rather than actual benchmarks on the GPU they will be using.
That's exactly what I'm saying. They are full of shit. GTX 1070 or 1080 level performance will not be happening in a console this generation. Also there"s no way a 580 is running much of anything at native 4K. We are talking about a GPU that sometimes doesn't even pull off 1080p/60fps. Guarantee they are using upscaling and other fake fuckery to do 4K. I absolutely believe that running at 1080p on ultra settings upscaled to 4k (which I am dead certain is what they are doing), it's faster than a 1070 running at native 4k. But that's not a fair comparison.
I'm betting that this is how Microsoft is pulling off that GTX 1070 performance. Microsoft has ingeniously baked in DirectX 12 into the Project Scorpio's GPU's command processor to significantly reduce instruction sets and thus dramatically improve the instruction command processing sent by the highly customized 2.73GHz Jaguar evolved CPU. Essentially Project Scorpio's direct hardware-based DX12 integration should substantially improve game-to-GPU communication and actively reduce CPU overhead. This streamlined efficiency is half of the magic that makes Scorpio tick, and sees the console's components in a kind of uniform synergy. http://www.tweaktown.com/news/57039/project-scorpio-optimized-directx-12-games/index.html
I have no doubt that games are being rendered at 4k, PS4 Pro renders above 1080p before it checkerboards and sometimes even that hits 2160p and Digital Foundry are a very credible source. Still changes nothing, no point spending £450 on one to play cross platform games when it has no exclusives I want and barely any at all overall.
Playstation has always had more exclusives than Xbox. Japanese developers prefer working with Sony. MS's only strong point was 3rd party supremacy, which made the first person shooters shine. This is why the 360 was the goto console for shooters. Unfortunately, they lost that power edge in 2013. But they'll get that cutting edge lead back this November. I'm sure that shooters on the PS4 will still be fun, but the same was true of the PS3 ten years ago.
The majority of the most graphically impressive games on Pro have a native resolution of 3200 * 1800 using a 2160p frame buffer. Around 3x the pixels of 1080p rather than 4x of 4K. Some games use something totally different, though. Insomniac has their own technique that looks as good as the best 1800p checkerboard games. Blizzard has an adaptive resolution technique that was so smooth in Diablo III I rarely noticed settings had changed. X will use these techniques as well. It just makes sense to utilize computationally efficient techniques as consumers purchase higher resolution TVs. Seeing Ratchet on an OLED made it clear developers should use whichever techniques and settings they want to make their games look and run best.
Instead of a full 4K performance, I'd rather for them to go for higher res textures & extra geometry. Bump that detail way up there. And then do that checkerboarding to hit the 4K mark. I think that's what they did with Anthem.
@Alpolio That's the point of more these more computationally efficient techniques. Checkerboard rendering has been getting trashed by the video games media as being "fake 4K" or "faux K" giving people who have never seen them running on an 4K/ HDR screen the impression that they are being ripped off, but it's what has allowed games like Horizon to look much better than the hardware specs might have suggested while still having a stable frame rate. These checkerboard (or alternative techniques like Insomniac's "temporal injection") games are typically still going to be outputting around 3x the pixels of your typical console game while freeing up some extra power for better detail and effects. Theoretically, these types of techniques could also make the cutting edge PC games more marketable. The Crysis or Metro type projects are expensive and few people have PCs that can actually run them at a playable framerate, but having settings that still look very good and run well could provide these games we're not seeing much of these days more potential buyers. Greater flexibility and options are great for these higher spec consoles and potentially PC gaming if implemented.
Rise of the Tomb Raider was so dull, I never even finished it. The hardware looks alright, but they need to get some better games, or this thing isn't going to sell.