twilo99
Member
Not pointless for people who can't afford $500...
-
Hey, guest user. Hope you're enjoying NeoGAF! Have you considered registering for an account? Come join us and add your take to the daily discourse.
Baldur's Gate 3 dev shows off the level of optimization achieved for the Xbox Series S port (34% reduction in VRAM usage & 10% reduction in RAM usage)
- Thread starter Thick Thighs Save Lives
- Start date
- Game Dev Platform
Not pointless for people who can't afford $500...
cartman414
Member
No but they could have just cut the drive and left the specs the same for a $400 price.
Banjo64
cumsessed
These devs have done a great job with their Switch port though.
Senua
Member
I thought general RAM usage on consoles was lower than VRAM.
Except it’s not , it’s for example a low entry point to even play Baldurs gate 3.. for 285, a console and buy the game. And Gamepass for games Like Forza 8 or Star field . Not everyone wants to spend 500 - 550 to play the latest games.
Last edited:
WitchHunter
Banned
Baldur's Gate 3 dev shows off the level of optimization achieved for the Xbox Series S port, which bodes well for future PC updates
Larian must have cast a transmutation spell on the code to get these gains.www.pcgamer.com
Yeah, but why months after release? Why spending years in early access (beta) to no avail?
DenchDeckard
Moderated wildly
What's crazy about all this...is people talk and then create a narrative....then they go back and do some actual work, suddenly they come back with how they've actually got something to work...
It's wild. I would piss myself if it launched with co op on series s, in the end.
It's wild. I would piss myself if it launched with co op on series s, in the end.
Topher
Gold Member
Yeah, that narrative that was created about how the issues with XSS was all due to Larian's lack of developer chops has been quashed quite resoundingly I'd say.
Topher
Gold Member
The issue is Microsoft does not allow developers to make games for XSX but not XSS. Also, the only problem with XSS was getting split screen coop to work which was also required by MS (parity clause). MS removed that requirement so that the game could be released on Xbox. So now only XSX has the option for split screen coop.
Bojji
Member
They can't fuck series s, MS says: both consoles or none.
They made special case for them anyway, they are allowed to make Series S version without split screen co-op.
I think problem is that it's you optimize for ram in s, those same optimizations usually carry to ps5 and x as well. Not a problem now, but for next game it could be.
Pedro Motta
Member
OMG series S best console ever!!!
LordOfChaos
Member
See folks, Series S isn't holding back the generation, it's forcing optimization 
DaGwaphics
Member
In what world is better optimization ever a bad thing?
It will still be a good thing for the next game and the game after that.
MonkeyClaw36
Member
Uhhh duh!? IT forces devs to properly optimize their games. Lessons learned can be put to use for other platforms and future titles.
Neo_GAF
Banned
are you sure?
what about the ms flight simulator? i thought that is only on pc and series x?
and i remember seeing dmc 5 being 120fps and only available on series x...
or was i wrong?
Topher
Gold Member
All games on XSX are also on XSS. No exceptions.
Schmick
Member
Feature parity is slightly different to what you are describing.
MS FS is available on Series S.
ChoosableOne
ChoosableAll
It could be because they prefer to dedicate time to improving the game itself rather than succumbing to Microsoft's spoiled sales strategy. It's absurd that they have to deal with this instead of focusing on DLC.
twilo99
Member
It’s ridiculous to complain about them making the game run better, and how do you know they aren’t working on a DLC at the same time?
Punished Miku
Gold Member
They don't have to do anything. Series S is the leading system. If they want to put the game on it they can, or they can skip it. If they want to make DLC they can do that too. Acting like they're victims for just making their game run on the system is pretty absurd.
twilo99
Member
Sure, but they weren’t going for the $400 price point, where they?
Last edited:
Zathalus
Member
Honestly $299 is a good price, but for what it is it should be even cheaper. No disk drive, half the SSD, a third of the power and you don't even get it at half the price of the X.
Topher
Gold Member
Phil Spencer said they are losing $100 to $200 on every console sold. From a value perspective, I think you are right, but from a cost to build view I don't think they wanted to lose any more than they already were.
UltimaKilo
Gold Member
For consumers, yes. Developers will use it as an excuse to charge more.
That’s actually a poor reflection on the industry as a whole.See folks, Series S isn't holding back the generation, it's forcing optimization
Fabieter
Member
Saving is also possible. The new series s costs 350 bucks.
Shadowstar39
Member
Zathalus
Member
I think Phil Spencer is using creative accounting to get to that number. He is likely including R&D and a bunch of other metrics to justify that number. No one in hell is the BOM for a Series S at $400.
Shadowstar39
Member
Maybe, but when asking for it as a xmas/bday gift , most people aren't going to spend half a grand for their son/daughter (kids or adults), spouse, or friend. $300-350 is more reasonable. this only applies if you are buying yourself.
I bought myself a ps5, but I wouldn't of asked my wife or mom for such a gift. I may put on a series s to my list as someone may actually buy it, series x way to pricey. Unless you are rich, like those ridiculous commercials where the spouse or parents are gifting mercedes and lexuses...
ChoosableOne
ChoosableAll
I'm not complaining about them, I love Larian. I blame Microsoft for this. In an attempt to release budget-friendly consoles, they are dragging down the performance of the next-gen consoles, causing studios like Larian to make unnecessary extra efforts
Ps 4 is better if you are talking about sale numbers. Series S leads nothing.
Senua
Member
Not everyone has that luxury, some people budget. Others have have a limit they will spend on entertainment out of their income. Really rubs me the wrong way when people generalise about this shit
Fabieter
Member
Well I bought my first consoles from pocket money any money I got from birthday etc. I saved as much as I could to get tje consoles. Helped in my Village were I could to manage to buy it myself. I think even a series s is too much of a gift.
Punished Miku
Gold Member
twilo99
Member
ChoosableOne
ChoosableAll
It was ready for Series X, but they couldn't release it because Microsoft's strategy. It's like forcing everyone to make their games compatible for Ps4 or Switch. It's not about optimizing, it's about mandatory Series S tax.
Krappadizzle
Member
twilo99
Member
$250 would’ve been better but realistically, like
Topher
said, they are already losing money on them. Also, it’s actually very well built, I much rather have a quality product and pay an extra $50 than something built out of cheap materials with a noisy fan that overheats and crashes all the time.
Hot Take: Series S is necessary to put developers back into optimizing stuff, Baldur Gate 3 on PC has horrendous CPU usage like most releases, it stucks at 12 threads at best and anything above that doesn't do anything, even Starfield manages to use 24 threads. Alan Wake 2 runs the performance mode at 30 FPS and less technically demanding games run like shit.
Zathalus
Member
I don't see how. It's a cheap 512GB SSD with only 10GB of GDDR6 and a tiny SoC. Maybe at launch and early on due to component shortages, COVID, and rising TSMC costs but certainly not now when prices for everything (SSD, DRAM, Wafers) have crashed.$250 would’ve been better but realistically, like
OuterLimits
Member
Pretty much. Hell, Hello Games somehow got No Man's Sky running on the Switch.
twilo99
Member
True, so they are probably loosing less now than at launch, but I'd be surprised if they are making money on their hardware.. maybe in a few more years, but its all speculation.
WitchHunter
Banned
They had a whole, fully working game engine that perfecty suited DOS2! They started development around 2017. Game was announced in 2018. They went Early Access in 2020. And they released it this year august. So working around 5-6 years with close to 400 people and only the first act was done? The rest was a stiched together frankenstein shit. And you just can't imagine how can the last 2 acts became so shitty when the engine has to deliver the same performance throughout the game. But somehow they created this sloppy, slow, buggy piece of garbage. What the holy fuck were they doing? Everyone was wanking or what the fuck?
I tell you what happened. Either they have parallel projects or everyone was wanking, drinking coffee, bantering and the like. And then they cover up the whole shit with insane amounts of PR and marketing. And every braindead idiot on the net sucking up to them like this game is some miracle or wonder rpg game. Becuse they introduced proper actors and mocapping? And everyone said, whoooooooooooooooossssshhh this is so new, so groundbreaking, we have to forget every shit they pulled.
They spent almost 3 years in early access and your party's pathfinding was such a shit, you always had to babysit your team to get from A to B. I mean that is gross negligence. So what were they doing 3 years in EA? NOTHIIIING. And you pay 60 bucks and what you get in return, a sloppy shit, from a top gaming company. And even worse is that Wizards of the Coast bought this shit off them : DDDD. What's next? You have to finish the dialogues and the coding yourself or what?
$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$
Last edited:
cartman414
Member
You missed my followup message.
Maybe they should have.
PS5's been curb-stomping them either way.
DaGwaphics
Member
The bigger conundrum with that statement you had quoted would have been MS dragging down the performance of XSX/PS5, by dun, dun, dun... improving the performance (this developers own words, not my opinion).
Last edited: