That was a great video to watch. We need more studios like Moon Studios. Some of the stuff they are doing is truly impressive - and you can tell that the studio puts actual care into the "craft" of video game making rather than seemingly getting stuff sloshed together to get a release out the door.
Moon Studios wanted a very specific look and feel to the game and came up with brilliant ways to portray it with careful attention to detail!
Perhaps there is more stuff like this going on with AAA developers than we realize (as indie developers are more "open" about the developer process than studios from Ubisoft, EA, etc.), but it just feels like smaller studios that have more to lose put in more effort.
I guess this is why Nintendo-made games have such charm to them as Nintendo can't afford to have games bomb.
@Fiendish-Beaver While I agree with you about the third-party part, Sony does have a habit of locking "timed" exclusives [seemingly] indefinitely to PlayStation to the point that any exclusive that Sony once held coming to Xbox is news-worthy.
@TheLastHarbinger Does Hogwarts let you travel to 3 different levels of a huge open world without any perceptible load times?
Does Hogwarts let you attach literally anything to the world to literally anything else?
Does Hogwarts let you craft equipment using any item found in the world that apply unique properties to that equipment?
Are all the trees, grass, rocks, in the world able to be interacted with in some way in Hogwarts?
Can you build vehicles in Hogwarts out of stuff found in the game world?
Does Hogwarts have a physics engine that governs everything I just listed?
I would highly agree that Zelda deserves best technical achievement because there is a level of interactivity, creativity, and ingenuity that even games on more powerful consoles haven't done before.
It isn't just because it's a big game running on Switch. It's the entire core design of the game that makes it a technical achievement. The fact it's being done on a mobile system with 3 usable CPU cores and only 3.5GB of useable RAM makes it all the more impressive.
@NEStalgia I’m excited about the prospect too and really hope it comes to fruition.
It puts the Xbox in a place where Microsoft is strongest: PC. It brings things back full circle to the Xbox original mission of bringing PC to a console experience.
And it gives me a PC more powerful than my Surface Book 2 that wouldn’t cost an arm and a leg!
@ShadowofTwilight We'll just have to agree to disagree.
An Xbox branded PC is a PC, not a closed console. Even if Microsoft was able to make that PC feel like a console (like the Steam Deck does), it's still not competing with PlayStation anymore. It's competing with all the other gaming PCs on the market.
Sony can absolutely try, but the backlash would be pretty intense. Sony would literally be blocking a purchased game from being installed on a PC simply because it has "Xbox" in the branding. The consequences wouldn't be in Sony's favor on that one.
I just don't see the PC market taking too kindly to Sony dictating what brands of PC they have to buy to install its games on an open platform.
Sony may very well be in its right to block such a thing, but the court of public opinion would probably force a change of heart after:
Massive refund requests
Petitions
Boycott of Sony PC games
etc.
It wouldn't even be a Microsoft vs Sony thing, this would be open-platform supporters vs Sony.
@ShadowofTwilight I think it would significantly impact Sony's PC market share to block that.
Let's say the next Xbox is an Xbox PC and it has Steam integration.
Valve could very well tell Sony to "pound sand" if it tries to block games on a PC platform brand simply because it's seen as "competition" to Sony. It's a PC game, not a PlayStation game at that point.
Any of the other store fronts (GOG, Epic, etc.) could tell Sony the same thing as these store fronts want to be in front of as many players as possible.
Sony needs Valve in the PC space way more than Valve needs Sony (same for the other storefronts).
Plus, PC gamers could see Sony as being a bunch of babies by attempting to block it on a PC just because it's manufactured by Microsoft (my Microsoft Surface Book 2 isn't blocked from Sony games, so why should an Xbox-branded PC?).
Sure, Sony could create its own launcher and leave the other storefronts, but if it did that just so it could control its games in the PC space, it will cut significantly into sales.
PC players don't play into this console wars garbage.
Sony has to "play nice" in the PC space because it has very little weight in the market - unlike Microsoft. If it doesn't, it might as well pull out of the PC space and continue to live in its own island and bleed money.
Market leader or not, it's clearly shown it needs to branch out beyond the plastic box.
@101Force It would have an effect on PC development as well - developers would finally have a standardize hardware profile to develop against in the desktop PC specific space (not the handheld PC as the Steam Deck made room for that) and can branch out accordingly from there.
It would be similar to developing against a closed Xbox console, but not since it's just the PC version with specific system specs to work against. Again, something the Xbox was trying to do in the first place all those years ago.
Time will tell, but I would love Microsoft to play into its strengths (PC and software) rather than continue going down the traditional console path.
@GuyinPA75 I see where you are coming from, but I am coming from something like the Steam Deck where it's a very "console" experience, but is also a "PC".
What if the experience was more like Xbox looks now, except the entire backend is PC-based? It can play PC versions of games. PC games get "Xbox certified" with settings automatically set for optimal experience on the "Xbox PC". Legacy games can run in an official emulator (or whatever Microsoft uses to still support older titles that can't cross-save to a PC version).
It basically marries the console experience with PC.
Much like the Steam Deck, PC versions can be validated against the "Xbox PC" during development to ensure a solid experience there while still able to scale games accordingly for different hardware.
Short story, long: take the concepts that Valve started with the Steam Deck and make it even more user-friendly so that one still gets the console experience of insert disc/download game and play except it's just that it's the PC version instead. All the user sees is what they see now.
Keeps options available for those who are power users to allow them to go in and tweak stuff if they want, but the base experience is no different that what we see now.
@101Force My thoughts exactly. It could also mean they are working on a way for this to work on a broad range of hardware (i.e. PC) so that the next Xbox won’t be a closed system but a PC-based console.
With this and Phil’s comments regarding having multiple storefronts on Xbox is starting to lean in that direction - which was the original goal of Xbox: a PC in the living room.
@NEStalgia Curious what kind of TV you're playing this on.
Mine is a Vizio M7 Quantum. It's only a 60Hz LCD, but it does offer VRR (only down to 40Hz, so the 30fps mode is well out of the support VRR range).
I'll have to fire up the game again and see if I noticed any screen tearing - I am actually very sensitive to it so the fact I never saw it at all is curious.
But, I also know people are very sensitive to 30fps and see it as unplayable.
I'm not arguing your feeling on Graphics Mode, it's just odd that what you describe is very extreme to the experience I had with the game.
I went to check to see if Digital Foundry found something I may have not noticed but even they only found rare instances where framerate went below 30fps (by like 1 or 2 frames) and frame pacing was off and noted no screen tearing in the Graphics Mode.
@NEStalgia Screen tear? I never noticed screen tear once. As far as stutter, I never noticed that either.
I never turned Performance Mode on once.
Maybe it's because I am not sensitive to 30fps that I didn't have a problem with it. The whole game felt fine to me in the almost 60 hours I played it in Quality Mode. 🤷♂️
@Fiendish-Beaver It was good. I wouldn't call it the GOTY Contender people were saying when it was released, but it was still enjoyable.
Definitely more "God of War" than Final Fantasy. Some sections reminded me more of something like Bayonetta.
Story was good, though nothing I haven't seen before. It had some cool moments, though.
Graphically it was pretty impressive. Performance was consistent (I played in the Default 30fps Mode).
There is an update coming that will better identify "Important" side quests over just content filler quests that don't give much (though getting the EXP is probably helpful to get ahead as grinding would take forever - not that it's necessary).
I only like to delve into longer video games once every few games.
I am just coming off of Final Fantasy XVI and clocked about 60 hours. While I do have Final Fantasy VII Rebirth, I couldn't jump into it right away, so I decided to get sucked into Alone in the Dark to "cleanse the palate."
@Tyrant_T103 The thing is, there were a ton of games that ran at 60fps back then and there were games that ran at less. However, no one really could tell the difference because no one knew the actual framerate because no one was analyzing it. Slowdown was the only thing people noticed.
Once these things started to get reported on and analyzed, it suddenly became a "problem".
Now, I definitely support your argument that developers (and gamers) should lower expectations, but I don't think 60fps should be a mandate. I do think a locked framerate on a console should be a mandate.
However, developers should be able to make the game they want to make without reprisal whether they choose to make things more graphically dense at 30fps or choose 60fps+ at the cost of visual fidelity.
If the developer wants to have "Modes" in these games, the highest performing mode should be main target during development and any lower-performing modes are secondary.
Trying to push a 30fps development target up to 60fps sours the experience as it generally leads to terrible image quality and unstable performance.
@awp69 I miss the "old days" when games just released and no one really knew what framerate a game was running - nor was it even reported by anyone.
I had no idea that Ocarina of Time ran at like 25fps or that Star Fox was like 15fps. I just played the game and was never bothered. Heck, I still don't care.
While I certainly love Digital Foundry analysis because I am fascinated about technology and how developers do what they do, but, at the same time, they kind of popularized performance metrics being a "thing".
Developers should just release games how they want to release them, offer no modes, and never report performance metrics and DF should just focus on the visual aspects and leave the framerate analysis out.
60fps is a design choice, not some "option" that gets shoe-horned in because..."60fps or bust".
Believe me, no one was saying "gosh this framerate is unbearable" back in those days (well, unless slowdown was atrocious to the point of unplayable). They talked about the content and fun-factor of the game instead.
30fps is fine for me as long as it's a steady 30fps.
Honestly, unless you switch to 60fps and then switch back, the difference isn't as staggering as some people make it out to be.
Developers should have every right to push visual fidelity at 30fps if that's the experience they want without "gamers" moaning and groaning that it's not 4K60.
Heck, I am sure that if video game consoles were able to engage a TV's 24fps mode like movies do, developers would use that for "cinematic experiences" (that would be pretty awesome actually).
It feels like there is a definite disconnect between the gaming community as a whole and those handling the reviews.
One would look at those scores and think "Wow, Microsoft has released a fair amount of really good games" and, yet, to look at the comments section of many sites, Microsoft doesn't have any good games. 🤷♂️
Seeing as how the shadows at their highest setting on PC also look "worse", I'd chalk this up to simply API differences between DirectX and whatever Sony uses.
But, of course, the internet has to make mountains out of molehills.
@Tomato_Goose I hope it's not true that it's open world. In my opinion, it kind of "breaks" the tension of Resident Evil.
The biggest strength of Resident Evil is feeling constrained and having no choice but to fight your way out of a situation. I feel like going open world would ruin that.
@northernmonkey75 Probably take you from an average ~40fps to an average ~42 fps.
I understand that this is Capcom's first foray in open world game with the RE engine, but this doesn't give anyone a great first impression.
And with talks of RE9 going open world, this game doesn't instill confidence it will be any good.
I hope the 30fps cap is at least smooth for those interested in this title.
I am really starting to hate the game industry - especially the "release now, patch later" mentality.
Nintendo are one of the few developers out there who don't rely on "Day 1 Patches". Its games are the only games I have confidence that, when I insert a cartridge into the Switch, I won't be greeted with a lengthy download before I can play.
Okay, so maybe saying "I don't care" was a little misleading. I do care to a certain degree (and I am aware of the pros and cons for each mode), it's just that the default setting is perfectly fine for the vast majority of games.
@NEStalgia Ugh, all that smoothing in TV's is terrible - I turn off all video processing on my TVs.
I do set "film mode" on my TV - but that's for 24fps films and is not soap opera mode.
I will say, if the Default Mode is hot garbage...I do switch it.
I play Final Fantasy XVI at the default Graphics Mode because the 30fps is actually a lock and it's stable where the 60fps isn't.
I did the same for Final Fantasy VII Remake (though I stopped playing a few hours in to focus on FF16 because I try to discipline myself to playing and finish 1 game at a time).
I turned RT on in Resident Evil 4 because the SSR on water bodies was really bad and extremely distracting. The unlocked framerate was covered by VRR.
I left it in Quality Mode on Jedi Survivor.
I left Alan Wake 2 in the Default Mode.
I changed to Performance Mode on Redfall because the game was virtually identical between modes except for 60fps.
I switched to Performance Mode in Elden Ring because those games need to run higher than 30fps and VRR ironed out the framerate drops.
But I understand what you mean about people potentially not getting the best experience either due to marketing decisions or plain ignorance.
Honestly, I wish we didn't have modes. I miss the days of games just being "as is" on consoles. If I want to fiddle with settings, I'd go back to PC gaming. Well...except for 120Hz Mode...I understand having that choice as 120Hz is not standard.
But if a developer wants to make a game target 4K (or 1440p) 60fps on consoles, then make it the best game possible at a locked 60fps on consoles.
If a developer wants to target 4K (or 1440p) at 30fps on consoles, then make it the best game possible at a locked 30fps on consoles.
And no, I don't think developers should get crapped on for making a 30fps with no other options. Usually, you can tell when 30fps was a target as the Performance Mode is extremely compromised and uneven.
@NEStalgia On one hand, I agree with you, but then you see thing things like the Nintendo Switch almost being the highest selling console of all time - beating out consoles with considerably more power.
I would bet a vast majority of people don't even open the Options menu of a console game and simply play on "Default" settings. And I bet those people couldn't even tell you if a game is 30fps or 60fps. 1080p or 4K. Rasterization or real-time RT. They simply don't care.
I know I have gotten to that point. I play on whatever Graphics Mode is the default because I just stopped caring and want to play the game.
The only reason I go into the menu is to ensure spatial audio settings are set (because I care more about that than fussing over Performance or Quality).
That being said, I still stand by what I said about why I want RT to become standard: to take some of the load off artists during development.
I was a little skeptical about this, but I could see this being quite popular with those who hated what happened to Overwatch when it was taken away after Overwatch 2 came out.
It's not something I am interested in because I don't like these kinds of games, but it does look better than what I imagined.
People argue if real-time raytracing all together is a waste of time - especially when there is little to no perceptible difference between the rasterized lighting and the ray-traced lighting.
I'd say it's too much for current-gen consoles.
But I don't think RT is a waste of time.
Here's why: it's a huge "time saver" for developers - especially as character models and environmental effects get increasingly more complex. It just starts to get harder to convincingly "fake" proper lighting when more and more objects are on screen or there is more geometric complexity of a scene. That doesn't mean games will come out any faster, it just means that artists can focus on something else more interesting now that lighting elements are handled via RT.
4A games (makers of Metro) has switched over entirely to an RT studio because of the time it saves by not worrying about rasterized lighting "issues".
Rather than having to approximate/handcraft shadows, light placement, bounce lighting, ambient occlusion, etc. having a full RT (or better yet, path-traced) pipeline lets the artists be more like set designers - they place the lights where they want for the desired look without having to worry about ensuring the other aspects of lighting are properly addressed - they just "work".
This opens up more possibilities for artists since the lighting model is completely "trivialized" - perhaps artists can make scenes even more complex. Character models looks more complex. Perhaps even new gameplay mechanics will emerge when light doesn't have to be quite so "hand crafted".
3D at one point looked way worse than 2D Sprite-work. 3D also ran horribly (Star Fox was 15fps, Ocarina of Time was like 25fps, etc). Yet, switching to 3D helped overcome certain obstacles in order to focus on other things that would have become an absolute nightmare using 2D sprites. We are starting to get to that point with lighting, too.
3D rendering has all but become trivial at this point because major players in technology took it seriously enough to actually try to advance it. While it feels like Nvidia is the only one driving the RT train.
So, while the technology certainly doesn't have a huge benefit right now, I do want to continue to see it get used in the future until it becomes a "standard" so developers can focus on improving things elsewhere rather than worrying about whether the GI looks right, or if the shadows are animating at the proper speed and proportions, or if a probe light to simulate "darkness" is too light/dark, etc.
If Microsoft can get Steam, GOG, Epic on Xbox consoles, then it achieve what it set out to do over 20 years ago: finally making the dream of PC in the living room.
I think a lot of people define Xbox as the physical box with which you use. So, for them, they feel like all the investment they made in the ecosystem becomes moot and should invest elsewhere so that they only have to pay one low price for a console that plays everything.
Microsoft defines Xbox as the gaming wing of Microsoft. So, in that sense, it does make Xbox stronger because it supplies more revenue (and hopefully profit) to the gaming wing of Microsoft.
Dear Microsoft, Make your next console seamlessly run the PC versions of games so that way this whole "no point supporting Xbox" goes away.
The original point of the Xbox was so that people making PC games could easily make a console version. That vision seems to have gone away. I thought the GDK was supposed to streamline Windows and Xbox development, but that doesn't appear to be the case (especially when the GDK on PC is apparently only for games meant to be on Game Pass).
If you still choose a "closed system" then figure out a way to get back the basic principles and make Xbox development so trivial that PC versions can quickly get converted to Xbox versions so that this kind of argument is moot.
Not everything needs to be converted to an open world - especially Resident Evil where funneling you through specific locations is what builds the tension.
I quite like the current format for RE Remakes and RE 7/8 - let's keep doing that!
@alexcarv_guardiang3 @DJKingaling That would be pretty messed up if they took Microsoft's ID@Xbox money and ran!
I understand the market reach is bigger by focusing on PS5 and PC, but at the same time Microsoft appears to do more for helping indie developers than Nintendo or Sony with the ID@Xbox program.
If this is truly what happened, taking that money and turning around and saying they will "reassess the possibility of an Xbox release post-launch." is the very definition of "biting the hand that feeds."
It's a shame, but, Microsoft is still a business and not a charity.
I am sure everything looked great at first, but it shouldn't come to anyone's surprise that if Microsoft isn't making any money because a lot of people are simply using points to fund Xbox purchases, something was going to change.
Being able to earn points by playing games that can be used to get more games is still pretty darn generous if you ask me - even if you can't get said games as often as you could before.
@PsBoxSwitchOwner But, again, it had zero hinderance on their gameplay experience.
If the reviewer had reached a point where suddenly a paywall had come up, then, yes, I can see where that would reduce the score - part of the experience is inaccessible/significantly hindered due to having to fork over real money.
None of the actual game experience was hindered during the reviewers playtime. They reviewed the game...not the company's business strategy.
The game they played without shelling out money was a 10/10 in their view (bear in mind, it was also noted that MTX was going to exist when the review was written).
I am not defending MTX by any stretch. I think they are ridiculous, and I simply don't buy them. But if the game is 100% enjoyable without ever needing to fork over extra money, then I don't see dropping a score out of principal or to send a message - people's wallets are a better message to send than a review score.
If MTX were an unknown and then suddenly "poof", MTX showed up, then I can see that as a problem. The reviewer knew it was coming and still gave it a 10/10.
If the MTX suddenly made a whole new area available post-review, then yes, I could where the review would want to amend the review because they didn't get the "whole" experience at time of review.
Neither of those happened.
Without really having knowledge of the game, it looks like the MTX are nothing more than convenience fees for those who want an easier time with the game. The MTX don't seem to be intrusive in any way. Why amend the score?
The reviewer knew they were coming. You know there are there. If the MTX are a problem for you, don't buy them or skip the game all together. That's your choice, just like it was the reviewers choice to still give the game a 10/10 despite knowing MTX were coming.
Comments 2,188
Re: Digital Foundry Impressed By 'Stunning Visual Design' In Ori Dev's New Game
That was a great video to watch. We need more studios like Moon Studios. Some of the stuff they are doing is truly impressive - and you can tell that the studio puts actual care into the "craft" of video game making rather than seemingly getting stuff sloshed together to get a release out the door.
Moon Studios wanted a very specific look and feel to the game and came up with brilliant ways to portray it with careful attention to detail!
Perhaps there is more stuff like this going on with AAA developers than we realize (as indie developers are more "open" about the developer process than studios from Ubisoft, EA, etc.), but it just feels like smaller studios that have more to lose put in more effort.
I guess this is why Nintendo-made games have such charm to them as Nintendo can't afford to have games bomb.
Re: PlayStation Exclusive 'Kena: Bridge Of Spirits' Rated For Xbox Series X|S
@Fiendish-Beaver While I agree with you about the third-party part, Sony does have a habit of locking "timed" exclusives [seemingly] indefinitely to PlayStation to the point that any exclusive that Sony once held coming to Xbox is news-worthy.
Love it or hate it, Sony doesn't like to share.
Re: Alone In The Dark Performance Impresses Digital Foundry, Despite 'Sacrifices' On Xbox Series S
The game is a little janky at times, but I am really enjoying it.
I play on a VRR display, so the performance dips are completely hidden from me (except for the load stutters that happen every once in a while).
Re: Baldur's Gate 3 Sweeps 2024 BAFTAs, Hi-Fi RUSH Also Picks Up Award
@TheLastHarbinger Does Hogwarts let you travel to 3 different levels of a huge open world without any perceptible load times?
Does Hogwarts let you attach literally anything to the world to literally anything else?
Does Hogwarts let you craft equipment using any item found in the world that apply unique properties to that equipment?
Are all the trees, grass, rocks, in the world able to be interacted with in some way in Hogwarts?
Can you build vehicles in Hogwarts out of stuff found in the game world?
Does Hogwarts have a physics engine that governs everything I just listed?
I would highly agree that Zelda deserves best technical achievement because there is a level of interactivity, creativity, and ingenuity that even games on more powerful consoles haven't done before.
It isn't just because it's a big game running on Switch. It's the entire core design of the game that makes it a technical achievement. The fact it's being done on a mobile system with 3 usable CPU cores and only 3.5GB of useable RAM makes it all the more impressive.
Re: If Q1 Is Anything To Go By, 2024 Should Be Another Fantastic Year On Xbox
I am more excited about what is to come.
Alone in the Dark has been good on Xbox even if it's a tad janky.
Re: Xbox's Hellblade 2 Is 'On Another Level' Says Digital Foundry, Despite Series S Concerns
I can't wait to check it out!
Re: Shadow Of The Tomb Raider Is Available Today With Xbox Game Pass (April 11)
I gave it a Good as I didn't like this one quite as much as the previous 2 games.
But, if you are a Dolby Atmos enthusiast, Shadow (and Rise) feel like they were "built" around it!
Re: Star Wars Outlaws Sparks Criticism Over Games With $100+ 'Ultimate' Editions
You know the best way to combat these practices? Everyone stop buying them and just stick with the base game.
Re: Xbox Establishes New Team Dedicated To 'Game Preservation And Forward Compatibility'
@NEStalgia I’m excited about the prospect too and really hope it comes to fruition.
It puts the Xbox in a place where Microsoft is strongest: PC. It brings things back full circle to the Xbox original mission of bringing PC to a console experience.
And it gives me a PC more powerful than my Surface Book 2 that wouldn’t cost an arm and a leg!
Re: Xbox Establishes New Team Dedicated To 'Game Preservation And Forward Compatibility'
@ShadowofTwilight We'll just have to agree to disagree.
An Xbox branded PC is a PC, not a closed console. Even if Microsoft was able to make that PC feel like a console (like the Steam Deck does), it's still not competing with PlayStation anymore. It's competing with all the other gaming PCs on the market.
Sony can absolutely try, but the backlash would be pretty intense. Sony would literally be blocking a purchased game from being installed on a PC simply because it has "Xbox" in the branding. The consequences wouldn't be in Sony's favor on that one.
I just don't see the PC market taking too kindly to Sony dictating what brands of PC they have to buy to install its games on an open platform.
Sony may very well be in its right to block such a thing, but the court of public opinion would probably force a change of heart after:
Massive refund requests
Petitions
Boycott of Sony PC games
etc.
It wouldn't even be a Microsoft vs Sony thing, this would be open-platform supporters vs Sony.
Re: Xbox Establishes New Team Dedicated To 'Game Preservation And Forward Compatibility'
@ShadowofTwilight I think it would significantly impact Sony's PC market share to block that.
Let's say the next Xbox is an Xbox PC and it has Steam integration.
Valve could very well tell Sony to "pound sand" if it tries to block games on a PC platform brand simply because it's seen as "competition" to Sony. It's a PC game, not a PlayStation game at that point.
Any of the other store fronts (GOG, Epic, etc.) could tell Sony the same thing as these store fronts want to be in front of as many players as possible.
Sony needs Valve in the PC space way more than Valve needs Sony (same for the other storefronts).
Plus, PC gamers could see Sony as being a bunch of babies by attempting to block it on a PC just because it's manufactured by Microsoft (my Microsoft Surface Book 2 isn't blocked from Sony games, so why should an Xbox-branded PC?).
Sure, Sony could create its own launcher and leave the other storefronts, but if it did that just so it could control its games in the PC space, it will cut significantly into sales.
PC players don't play into this console wars garbage.
Sony has to "play nice" in the PC space because it has very little weight in the market - unlike Microsoft. If it doesn't, it might as well pull out of the PC space and continue to live in its own island and bleed money.
Market leader or not, it's clearly shown it needs to branch out beyond the plastic box.
Re: Xbox Establishes New Team Dedicated To 'Game Preservation And Forward Compatibility'
@NEStalgia I used to as well. But, I gave them to my brother when I joined the military and they are lost in the void.
Re: Xbox Establishes New Team Dedicated To 'Game Preservation And Forward Compatibility'
@NEStalgia "but most of what's on there is stuff so old a surface pro could run it."
Which is exactly why I love it!
Re: Xbox Establishes New Team Dedicated To 'Game Preservation And Forward Compatibility'
@ZYDIO I love me some GOG...though it's mostly for games from the 80's - early 2000s.
Even still...love me some GOG!
Re: Xbox Establishes New Team Dedicated To 'Game Preservation And Forward Compatibility'
@101Force It would have an effect on PC development as well - developers would finally have a standardize hardware profile to develop against in the desktop PC specific space (not the handheld PC as the Steam Deck made room for that) and can branch out accordingly from there.
It would be similar to developing against a closed Xbox console, but not since it's just the PC version with specific system specs to work against. Again, something the Xbox was trying to do in the first place all those years ago.
Time will tell, but I would love Microsoft to play into its strengths (PC and software) rather than continue going down the traditional console path.
Re: Xbox Establishes New Team Dedicated To 'Game Preservation And Forward Compatibility'
@GuyinPA75 I see where you are coming from, but I am coming from something like the Steam Deck where it's a very "console" experience, but is also a "PC".
What if the experience was more like Xbox looks now, except the entire backend is PC-based? It can play PC versions of games. PC games get "Xbox certified" with settings automatically set for optimal experience on the "Xbox PC". Legacy games can run in an official emulator (or whatever Microsoft uses to still support older titles that can't cross-save to a PC version).
It basically marries the console experience with PC.
Much like the Steam Deck, PC versions can be validated against the "Xbox PC" during development to ensure a solid experience there while still able to scale games accordingly for different hardware.
Short story, long: take the concepts that Valve started with the Steam Deck and make it even more user-friendly so that one still gets the console experience of insert disc/download game and play except it's just that it's the PC version instead. All the user sees is what they see now.
Keeps options available for those who are power users to allow them to go in and tweak stuff if they want, but the base experience is no different that what we see now.
Re: Xbox Establishes New Team Dedicated To 'Game Preservation And Forward Compatibility'
@101Force My thoughts exactly. It could also mean they are working on a way for this to work on a broad range of hardware (i.e. PC) so that the next Xbox won’t be a closed system but a PC-based console.
With this and Phil’s comments regarding having multiple storefronts on Xbox is starting to lean in that direction - which was the original goal of Xbox: a PC in the living room.
Re: Talking Point: Do You Prefer Shorter Or Longer Games In General?
@NEStalgia Curious what kind of TV you're playing this on.
Mine is a Vizio M7 Quantum. It's only a 60Hz LCD, but it does offer VRR (only down to 40Hz, so the 30fps mode is well out of the support VRR range).
I'll have to fire up the game again and see if I noticed any screen tearing - I am actually very sensitive to it so the fact I never saw it at all is curious.
But, I also know people are very sensitive to 30fps and see it as unplayable.
I'm not arguing your feeling on Graphics Mode, it's just odd that what you describe is very extreme to the experience I had with the game.
I went to check to see if Digital Foundry found something I may have not noticed but even they only found rare instances where framerate went below 30fps (by like 1 or 2 frames) and frame pacing was off and noted no screen tearing in the Graphics Mode.
You sure your PS5 is working okay?
Re: Talking Point: Do You Prefer Shorter Or Longer Games In General?
@Fiendish-Beaver There is a demo that covers the Prologue - so there is no risk trying it.
Re: Talking Point: Do You Prefer Shorter Or Longer Games In General?
@NEStalgia Screen tear? I never noticed screen tear once. As far as stutter, I never noticed that either.
I never turned Performance Mode on once.
Maybe it's because I am not sensitive to 30fps that I didn't have a problem with it. The whole game felt fine to me in the almost 60 hours I played it in Quality Mode. 🤷♂️
Re: Talking Point: Do You Prefer Shorter Or Longer Games In General?
@Fiendish-Beaver It was good. I wouldn't call it the GOTY Contender people were saying when it was released, but it was still enjoyable.
Definitely more "God of War" than Final Fantasy. Some sections reminded me more of something like Bayonetta.
Story was good, though nothing I haven't seen before. It had some cool moments, though.
Graphically it was pretty impressive. Performance was consistent (I played in the Default 30fps Mode).
There is an update coming that will better identify "Important" side quests over just content filler quests that don't give much (though getting the EXP is probably helpful to get ahead as grinding would take forever - not that it's necessary).
Re: Talking Point: Do You Prefer Shorter Or Longer Games In General?
I only like to delve into longer video games once every few games.
I am just coming off of Final Fantasy XVI and clocked about 60 hours. While I do have Final Fantasy VII Rebirth, I couldn't jump into it right away, so I decided to get sucked into Alone in the Dark to "cleanse the palate."
Re: Hellblade 2 Sounds Like A True Next-Gen Showcase In First Xbox Previews
@Tyrant_T103 The thing is, there were a ton of games that ran at 60fps back then and there were games that ran at less. However, no one really could tell the difference because no one knew the actual framerate because no one was analyzing it. Slowdown was the only thing people noticed.
Once these things started to get reported on and analyzed, it suddenly became a "problem".
Now, I definitely support your argument that developers (and gamers) should lower expectations, but I don't think 60fps should be a mandate. I do think a locked framerate on a console should be a mandate.
However, developers should be able to make the game they want to make without reprisal whether they choose to make things more graphically dense at 30fps or choose 60fps+ at the cost of visual fidelity.
If the developer wants to have "Modes" in these games, the highest performing mode should be main target during development and any lower-performing modes are secondary.
Trying to push a 30fps development target up to 60fps sours the experience as it generally leads to terrible image quality and unstable performance.
Re: Rumour: Gears 6 Could Appear At The Xbox Showcase This Summer
That screenshot reminds me that The Coalition are absolute wizards with Unreal Engine.
Can't wait to see what they come up with next!
Re: Hellblade 2 Sounds Like A True Next-Gen Showcase In First Xbox Previews
@awp69 I miss the "old days" when games just released and no one really knew what framerate a game was running - nor was it even reported by anyone.
I had no idea that Ocarina of Time ran at like 25fps or that Star Fox was like 15fps. I just played the game and was never bothered. Heck, I still don't care.
While I certainly love Digital Foundry analysis because I am fascinated about technology and how developers do what they do, but, at the same time, they kind of popularized performance metrics being a "thing".
Developers should just release games how they want to release them, offer no modes, and never report performance metrics and DF should just focus on the visual aspects and leave the framerate analysis out.
60fps is a design choice, not some "option" that gets shoe-horned in because..."60fps or bust".
Believe me, no one was saying "gosh this framerate is unbearable" back in those days (well, unless slowdown was atrocious to the point of unplayable). They talked about the content and fun-factor of the game instead.
Re: Xbox Series X|S Versions Of Hellblade 2 Confirmed To Run At 30FPS
30fps is fine for me as long as it's a steady 30fps.
Honestly, unless you switch to 60fps and then switch back, the difference isn't as staggering as some people make it out to be.
Developers should have every right to push visual fidelity at 30fps if that's the experience they want without "gamers" moaning and groaning that it's not 4K60.
Heck, I am sure that if video game consoles were able to engage a TV's 24fps mode like movies do, developers would use that for "cinematic experiences" (that would be pretty awesome actually).
I personally can't wait to see this in action.
Re: These Are The 10 Highest-Rated Xbox Exclusives Of This Generation So Far
It feels like there is a definite disconnect between the gaming community as a whole and those handling the reviews.
One would look at those scores and think "Wow, Microsoft has released a fair amount of really good games" and, yet, to look at the comments section of many sites, Microsoft doesn't have any good games. 🤷♂️
Re: Xbox's Hi-Fi RUSH Actually Has 'Slightly' Improved Visuals On PS5
Seeing as how the shadows at their highest setting on PC also look "worse", I'd chalk this up to simply API differences between DirectX and whatever Sony uses.
But, of course, the internet has to make mountains out of molehills.
Re: Xbox Honors Akira Toriyama With Free 'Blue Dragon' Dynamic Background
@Jenkinss Sung by Ian Gillan from the classic band Deep Purple
Re: Xbox Honors Akira Toriyama With Free 'Blue Dragon' Dynamic Background
Amazing game and it plays perfectly on Series X (and I assume S)! No slowdown or screen tear!
Re: Dragon's Dogma 2 Patch Notes Re-Confirmed Ahead Of First Xbox Update
@Tomato_Goose I hope it's not true that it's open world. In my opinion, it kind of "breaks" the tension of Resident Evil.
The biggest strength of Resident Evil is feeling constrained and having no choice but to fight your way out of a situation. I feel like going open world would ruin that.
Re: Dragon's Dogma 2 Patch Notes Re-Confirmed Ahead Of First Xbox Update
@northernmonkey75 Probably take you from an average ~40fps to an average ~42 fps.
I understand that this is Capcom's first foray in open world game with the RE engine, but this doesn't give anyone a great first impression.
And with talks of RE9 going open world, this game doesn't instill confidence it will be any good.
I hope the 30fps cap is at least smooth for those interested in this title.
I am really starting to hate the game industry - especially the "release now, patch later" mentality.
Nintendo are one of the few developers out there who don't rely on "Day 1 Patches". Its games are the only games I have confidence that, when I insert a cartridge into the Switch, I won't be greeted with a lengthy download before I can play.
Re: Xbox Game Pass Indie Deals Have 'Come Down In Scope', Claim Devs
All good things must come to an end, I guess.
Honestly, I haven't really touched an indie game in a while. Nothing against them, just so many other great games out there that grabbed my attention.
Re: Gearbox Entertainment Acquired By 2K As Team Confirms 'Borderlands 4'
I honestly thought Gearbox was already under 2K's wing.
Re: Talking Point: Has Ray Tracing Been A 'Complete Waste Of Time' For Xbox Series X|S?
@NEStalgia Yeah. LOL!
Okay, so maybe saying "I don't care" was a little misleading. I do care to a certain degree (and I am aware of the pros and cons for each mode), it's just that the default setting is perfectly fine for the vast majority of games.
Re: Talking Point: Has Ray Tracing Been A 'Complete Waste Of Time' For Xbox Series X|S?
@NEStalgia Ugh, all that smoothing in TV's is terrible - I turn off all video processing on my TVs.
I do set "film mode" on my TV - but that's for 24fps films and is not soap opera mode.
I will say, if the Default Mode is hot garbage...I do switch it.
I play Final Fantasy XVI at the default Graphics Mode because the 30fps is actually a lock and it's stable where the 60fps isn't.
I did the same for Final Fantasy VII Remake (though I stopped playing a few hours in to focus on FF16 because I try to discipline myself to playing and finish 1 game at a time).
I turned RT on in Resident Evil 4 because the SSR on water bodies was really bad and extremely distracting. The unlocked framerate was covered by VRR.
I left it in Quality Mode on Jedi Survivor.
I left Alan Wake 2 in the Default Mode.
I changed to Performance Mode on Redfall because the game was virtually identical between modes except for 60fps.
I switched to Performance Mode in Elden Ring because those games need to run higher than 30fps and VRR ironed out the framerate drops.
But I understand what you mean about people potentially not getting the best experience either due to marketing decisions or plain ignorance.
Honestly, I wish we didn't have modes. I miss the days of games just being "as is" on consoles. If I want to fiddle with settings, I'd go back to PC gaming. Well...except for 120Hz Mode...I understand having that choice as 120Hz is not standard.
But if a developer wants to make a game target 4K (or 1440p) 60fps on consoles, then make it the best game possible at a locked 60fps on consoles.
If a developer wants to target 4K (or 1440p) at 30fps on consoles, then make it the best game possible at a locked 30fps on consoles.
And no, I don't think developers should get crapped on for making a 30fps with no other options. Usually, you can tell when 30fps was a target as the Performance Mode is extremely compromised and uneven.
Re: Talking Point: Has Ray Tracing Been A 'Complete Waste Of Time' For Xbox Series X|S?
@NEStalgia On one hand, I agree with you, but then you see thing things like the Nintendo Switch almost being the highest selling console of all time - beating out consoles with considerably more power.
I would bet a vast majority of people don't even open the Options menu of a console game and simply play on "Default" settings. And I bet those people couldn't even tell you if a game is 30fps or 60fps. 1080p or 4K. Rasterization or real-time RT. They simply don't care.
I know I have gotten to that point. I play on whatever Graphics Mode is the default because I just stopped caring and want to play the game.
The only reason I go into the menu is to ensure spatial audio settings are set (because I care more about that than fussing over Performance or Quality).
That being said, I still stand by what I said about why I want RT to become standard: to take some of the load off artists during development.
Re: 'Marvel Rivals' Dev Hints At Possible Xbox Version Following PC Launch
I was a little skeptical about this, but I could see this being quite popular with those who hated what happened to Overwatch when it was taken away after Overwatch 2 came out.
It's not something I am interested in because I don't like these kinds of games, but it does look better than what I imagined.
Re: Talking Point: Has Ray Tracing Been A 'Complete Waste Of Time' For Xbox Series X|S?
People argue if real-time raytracing all together is a waste of time - especially when there is little to no perceptible difference between the rasterized lighting and the ray-traced lighting.
I'd say it's too much for current-gen consoles.
But I don't think RT is a waste of time.
Here's why: it's a huge "time saver" for developers - especially as character models and environmental effects get increasingly more complex. It just starts to get harder to convincingly "fake" proper lighting when more and more objects are on screen or there is more geometric complexity of a scene. That doesn't mean games will come out any faster, it just means that artists can focus on something else more interesting now that lighting elements are handled via RT.
4A games (makers of Metro) has switched over entirely to an RT studio because of the time it saves by not worrying about rasterized lighting "issues".
Rather than having to approximate/handcraft shadows, light placement, bounce lighting, ambient occlusion, etc. having a full RT (or better yet, path-traced) pipeline lets the artists be more like set designers - they place the lights where they want for the desired look without having to worry about ensuring the other aspects of lighting are properly addressed - they just "work".
This opens up more possibilities for artists since the lighting model is completely "trivialized" - perhaps artists can make scenes even more complex. Character models looks more complex. Perhaps even new gameplay mechanics will emerge when light doesn't have to be quite so "hand crafted".
3D at one point looked way worse than 2D Sprite-work. 3D also ran horribly (Star Fox was 15fps, Ocarina of Time was like 25fps, etc). Yet, switching to 3D helped overcome certain obstacles in order to focus on other things that would have become an absolute nightmare using 2D sprites. We are starting to get to that point with lighting, too.
3D rendering has all but become trivial at this point because major players in technology took it seriously enough to actually try to advance it. While it feels like Nvidia is the only one driving the RT train.
So, while the technology certainly doesn't have a huge benefit right now, I do want to continue to see it get used in the future until it becomes a "standard" so developers can focus on improving things elsewhere rather than worrying about whether the GI looks right, or if the shadows are animating at the proper speed and proportions, or if a probe light to simulate "darkness" is too light/dark, etc.
Re: Phil Spencer Would Like To See Other Digital Storefronts Appear On Xbox
If Microsoft can get Steam, GOG, Epic on Xbox consoles, then it achieve what it set out to do over 20 years ago: finally making the dream of PC in the living room.
Re: Phil Spencer On Porting Exclusives: 'Every Decision We Make Is To Make Xbox Stronger'
This depends on your definition of Xbox, though.
I think a lot of people define Xbox as the physical box with which you use. So, for them, they feel like all the investment they made in the ecosystem becomes moot and should invest elsewhere so that they only have to pay one low price for a console that plays everything.
Microsoft defines Xbox as the gaming wing of Microsoft. So, in that sense, it does make Xbox stronger because it supplies more revenue (and hopefully profit) to the gaming wing of Microsoft.
Re: Major Game Maker Reportedly Questioning Xbox Support Amidst 'Falling Sales'
Dear Microsoft,
Make your next console seamlessly run the PC versions of games so that way this whole "no point supporting Xbox" goes away.
The original point of the Xbox was so that people making PC games could easily make a console version. That vision seems to have gone away. I thought the GDK was supposed to streamline Windows and Xbox development, but that doesn't appear to be the case (especially when the GDK on PC is apparently only for games meant to be on Game Pass).
If you still choose a "closed system" then figure out a way to get back the basic principles and make Xbox development so trivial that PC versions can quickly get converted to Xbox versions so that this kind of argument is moot.
Sincerely,
Me
Re: Rumour: Resident Evil 9 Could Go Open World Thanks To Dragon's Dogma 2
No. Just no.
Not everything needs to be converted to an open world - especially Resident Evil where funneling you through specific locations is what builds the tension.
I quite like the current format for RE Remakes and RE 7/8 - let's keep doing that!
Re: Talking Point: Xbox Series X|S Owners, How's Your Storage Looking In 2024?
I delete games when I am done with them, so storage isn’t an issue.
Re: Dragon's Dogma 2's Microtransactions Are Causing Controversy At Launch
@NEStalgia Liam said they were provided a file with the list of the MTX and prices as part of the review code.
Re: Dragon's Dogma 2's Microtransactions Are Causing Controversy At Launch
@NEStalgia From what I have seen (on PushSquare), the press was given a list of the MTX that would be available at launch.
So while I certainly think the MTX are scummy, the press was aware when making reviews.
Re: 'Enotria: The Last Song' Dev Cancels Xbox Series X|S Release, For Now
@alexcarv_guardiang3 @DJKingaling That would be pretty messed up if they took Microsoft's ID@Xbox money and ran!
I understand the market reach is bigger by focusing on PS5 and PC, but at the same time Microsoft appears to do more for helping indie developers than Nintendo or Sony with the ID@Xbox program.
If this is truly what happened, taking that money and turning around and saying they will "reassess the possibility of an Xbox release post-launch." is the very definition of "biting the hand that feeds."
Re: Suicide Squad: Kill The Justice League 'Season 1' Welcomes The Joker To The Funhouse
I am waiting for the patch notes to read "Remade the game as a single-player, non-GaaS, non-looter shooter" before I make the plunge.
Re: Xbox Users Are 'Gutted' About The Latest Microsoft Rewards Nerf
It's a shame, but, Microsoft is still a business and not a charity.
I am sure everything looked great at first, but it shouldn't come to anyone's surprise that if Microsoft isn't making any money because a lot of people are simply using points to fund Xbox purchases, something was going to change.
Being able to earn points by playing games that can be used to get more games is still pretty darn generous if you ask me - even if you can't get said games as often as you could before.
Re: Dragon's Dogma 2's Microtransactions Are Causing Controversy At Launch
@PsBoxSwitchOwner But, again, it had zero hinderance on their gameplay experience.
If the reviewer had reached a point where suddenly a paywall had come up, then, yes, I can see where that would reduce the score - part of the experience is inaccessible/significantly hindered due to having to fork over real money.
None of the actual game experience was hindered during the reviewers playtime. They reviewed the game...not the company's business strategy.
The game they played without shelling out money was a 10/10 in their view (bear in mind, it was also noted that MTX was going to exist when the review was written).
I am not defending MTX by any stretch. I think they are ridiculous, and I simply don't buy them. But if the game is 100% enjoyable without ever needing to fork over extra money, then I don't see dropping a score out of principal or to send a message - people's wallets are a better message to send than a review score.
If MTX were an unknown and then suddenly "poof", MTX showed up, then I can see that as a problem. The reviewer knew it was coming and still gave it a 10/10.
If the MTX suddenly made a whole new area available post-review, then yes, I could where the review would want to amend the review because they didn't get the "whole" experience at time of review.
Neither of those happened.
Without really having knowledge of the game, it looks like the MTX are nothing more than convenience fees for those who want an easier time with the game. The MTX don't seem to be intrusive in any way. Why amend the score?
The reviewer knew they were coming. You know there are there. If the MTX are a problem for you, don't buy them or skip the game all together. That's your choice, just like it was the reviewers choice to still give the game a 10/10 despite knowing MTX were coming.