JEECE

The CPU of the Series S is a lot better than the One X though.

I hope so. Spiderman 2 not being on PS4 is a great sign for sure.

I know that I'm just using those games as examples of recent AAA crossgen releases.

If only the company that believes in generations would make a similar announcement. Diablo 4 and Street Fighter 6 just bombed on PS4, and yet right now Sony is probably building at least some of their multiplayer games for PS4 "so we can have the broadest possible audience."

I wouldn't be too sure about that. Look at the absolute media blitz they've churned up just to play defense for them on the framerate issue. Can you imagine what they are going to have when this game launches? I mean all the major reviewers and YouTubers have preemptively decided that performance issues have to be excused on the basis of the scope of the game, so you know the reviews are going to be high. There will inevitably be a ton of "Xbox is back" articles, even from m...

Yep, it's a baseline for me to be interested in a multiplayer game that it's a good experience for everyone in a group, regardless of if they've played 2 hours, 20 hours, or 200 hours. I hate the more modern trend of the full multiplayer experience being locked behind hours of grinding (which creates an obvious opportunity for microtransactions).

That being said, I usually apply this principle more to shooters; for instance, it's one of the reasons L4D is so...

Yep. I wish devs would just take the next step in these situations and remove the progression system altogether.

Another one.

Another one.

Unfortunately I think other games will follow suit, and not just from MS. It won't surprise me at all if Sony tries to pull something similar with a major first party title in the next few years. Some nonsense about "well we want to squeeze as much as possible out of the PS5, so we made the choice to go with 30 fps to expand the size of the world, etc." I hope to be wrong but I think there will be at least one.

I really just think some of these devs are total...

I'd much rather play at 1080p and a high framerate. In fact, I frequently choose to do that on PC, despite having a 4K monitor.

Honestly, I wish they'd just ship every console game now with a dynamic resolution mode locked at 60fps. I don't care that it doesn't look as good for screenshots and presentations; they can use the 30 fps quality mode for that stuff. I just want the option, even if it means dealing with 900p sometimes.

See, I can believe that it's a coordinated campaign. I just don't think it is subsidized. I don't think MS (or any company) needs to pay journalists to do this. I just think there's a level of groupthink, which is probably actively cultivated on a game journalist discord server (or maybe a slack channel or something similar) while also being spread through Twitter, articles, etc.

You honestly have to wonder at this point if a bunch of these writers are on a discord or something and they decided to do a coordinated wave of "30 fps is fine" articles. We know that type of thing has happened before.

I guess the alternative is that they all just have the exact same opinions about everything. Not sure which option is worse, really.

Seriously, try to think of the last time you've seen so many outlets publish essentially the same article in such a short timespan. Did Screenrant really think they are adding anything to the discussion by recycling the same piece a number of other outlets have run in the last few days?

I'm not sure why you are getting downvoted; you are right. If dev times are longer, the only way to keep releasing the same amount of games (or more) is to have more teams.

They own tons of studios though, and many of them have multiple teams.

Remember that many of the same people defending 30fps in Starfield based on sandwiches clowned on 30fps in A Plague Tale: Requiem based on rats. And that game probably had about 15% of the budget of Starfield.

This might be the most coordinated I've seen games media since the push for the original Titanfall.