Erm. Perhaps with $700 million revenue they could afford to buy some optimisation experience?
this post was submitted on 03 Jan 2025
46 points (85.9% liked)
Gaming
20275 readers
856 users here now
Sub for any gaming related content!
Rules:
- 1: No spam or advertising. This basically means no linking to your own content on blogs, YouTube, Twitch, etc.
- 2: No bigotry or gatekeeping. This should be obvious, but neither of those things will be tolerated. This goes for linked content too; if the site has some heavy "anti-woke" energy, you probably shouldn't be posting it here.
- 3: No untagged game spoilers. If the game was recently released or not released at all yet, use the Spoiler tag (the little ⚠️ button) in the body text, and avoid typing spoilers in the title. It should also be avoided to openly talk about major story spoilers, even in old games.
founded 5 years ago
MODERATORS
The Series X|S combined has sold less than half the units of the PS5. I can't find sales numbers on the X vs S, but it seems like a lot of studios have determined it's just not really profitable to do that level of optimisation unless you can also squeeze the game onto Switch, which does not have as much overlap in demographics as the Xbox and PlayStation do.
The article cites Larian having similar issues with Baldur's Gate 3 and Remedy with Alan Wake 2. This isn't just one shitty lazy dev studio- this is Microsoft forcing hard decisions on devs by insisting on walking the Series S like they're in Weekend at Bernie's.
The Series S is so underpowered it can't run backwards compatible games enhanced for the Xbox One X, it can only run standard Xbox One/Xbox One S games.
Let that sink in for a minute... the last gen Xbox One X is more capable than the Xbox Series S.
MS has sold more S than X, according to a quick google. Not sure why you'd want to port a game to Xbox Series X without making the game playable on S.
They explained why in the comment you replied to.
That's not a financial decision. That's just them lacking technical expertise. And let's be real - the S is not some kind of potato. It's perfectly capable. You need ever so slightly less detailed 3D models and textures than on the X but I don't remember this being a huge issue during the PS4 generation.
the S is not some kind of potato. It's perfectly capable
It's not. That's what the OP and the comment you replied to were trying to tell you.
You can't buy your way past low-end hardware.
No, but you can hire for it. This is 100% skill issue.
It's a ton of work for a tiny bit of revenue, why bother. I'm sure they're just fine where they're at. I'm not coming to Microsoft's defense here whatsoever. The burden of affordability should not be thrown onto game devs
MS just needs to release a gaming OS. Just stop making XBOX hardware and make XBOX an operating system that can be installed on any PC. Like SteamOS.
We have Windows Pro, Windows Home, LTSC, etc. Why not Windows Gaming (XBOX)?
I have been saying for a few years now that i think Microsoft is getting out of console hardware, and pushing cloud gaming and Game Pass to the switch and PlayStation marketplaces.
We're already seeing game pass on certain Samsung smart TVs, all you need is a Bluetooth controller, which means the mobile phone market is right around the corner.
Is it too late for that?
I don't think a ton of people would care enough in the first place, and those that do would probably prefer SetamOS or PopOS or something else that isn't affiliated with Microsoft.
Is it too late for that?
Why would it be?
those that do would probably prefer SetamOS...or something else that isn't affiliated with Microsoft.
For whatever reason, millions of people obviously still prefer XBOX, in addition to or in place of, PC, Sony, Nintendo, etc. All this does is give those people more options.
or PopOS
PopOS does not deliver the console experience that I'm referring to.
Not having lots of SKUs and a user-managed OS is kinda what the console experience is about. Steam OS does not deliver a console experience. Steam Deck kinda does (except not really), but Steam OS is just a part of that.
Not having lots of SKUs and a user-managed OS is kinda what the console experience is about.
I dunno what a "user managed OS" means. There's no reason MS couldn't port the exact same experience, considering current and past XBOXes are both built on x86.
As far as SKUs, I agree, but that's only part of the console experience. The rest of it is a controller-first interface and streamlined processing. The various SKUs is also what attracts so many people to PC gaming, and in case you haven't noticed, it is an incredibly quickly-growing segment.
I guess I'm confused about what you're proposing then. Why would anyone - consumers, Microsoft, or Nintendo/Sony - want an Xbox operating system on a non-Xbox console?
I'm gonna refer you back to the original post.