Most games cost far less to make but have marketing budgets to match or even exceed their development costs. A big modern triple A title you are looking at $100m to develop and another $100m to market.
The momentum for the project is good. There are now hundreds of titles in an excellent running state. In the past year alone there have been 4 major releases. There is a good chance in another 12 months it'll be a refined emulator where most games can be played through.
Hardware requirements are fairly high, but improvements in the emulation and good old fashioned hardware advances eventually take care of that.
Sinking without trace. As I predicted a couple months ago after playing the beta.
To get the game to even run a locked 30FPS on Xbox One and Xbox One X requires a huge optimisation drive of every game object and every line of net code because it's nowhere near stable.
It's one thing going from 50FPS minimums to locking 60FPS on a console, because you only need to find 20 percent more frame time performance and your engine is already doing pretty decent at this point.
It's a totally different thing taking your game from goda...
"I've had to result to locking the games at a lower framerate than 60, and have found that 45 really is the sweet spot"
Just goes to show how PC gives you the option, and options are nice. Usually if you have a monitor that supports high refresh hertz Gsync/Freesync or not you can lock it wherever you want.
Sometimes if I can't hit the mega resolutions and settings I want solidly 60FPS in games I will do a trade off and run a game at 50...
Good games. Many of them are based around wars and conflicts that the United States was directly involved in. Most of those said conflicts often being glorified by other American media, or at the very least justified.
Bit strange that you would take to task video games without addressing all the other very obvious media outlets which reach so many more people and have been doing so for much longer. Like news, TV and film.
I'm guessing it's because...
Digital Foundry have proven time after time that Xbox One X is basically the same sort of performance as a GTX1060, maybe like one with a mild overclock which you usually get out the box from partner models.
It's definitely without any doubt or question not as fast as a GTX1070.
The latest mobile chipsets like the newer Tegra or Snapdragon 845 parts with an Adreno 630 are closing in on Xbox One level performance, but not quite there yet. The Snapdragon chips would be fairly expensive and supply will be restricted for a while.
Nvidia are nearest to home console performance with Tegra Xavier. It's not designed for gaming, the power draw is a tad too high for a handheld at 20 watts (really 10w on average is the max viable) but the fundamental GPU ...
Seemed dull to me when I played it, just another large world but empty feeling game lacking good gameplay mechanics that will *ahem* sink without trace.
Assault on the Control Room. A huge sprawling level with a bit of everything. Bridges, canyons, small interiors and big interiors. Confined outdoor spaces, sprawling battlefields. Close combat, distance sniping, warthogs, tanks, banshees, rocket launchers.
It's one of the greatest levels of any game, of any time. Ever.
Anyone that considers themselves to be a serious gamer and considers it as one of their main hobbies/passions should buy and own a good gaming PC.
It is like people that love cars and only aspire to own a diesel hatchback. I would argue you probably don't love them that much then.
If you really love cars you'll at least try and own a vehicle at some point in your life that can fulfill your love for entertaining cars. Even if it costs more than you...
Other people : It could be 60FPS on the Xbox One X!
Me: Not a chance. 30FPS max.
Other people: Spam disagree button to my comment
Me: Laugh at the ignorance. Was never going to be 60FPS on Xbox One X.
60FPS on this game on PC is amazing. It's gorgeously slick. You need a good PC (GTX1070ti) to achieve it in 4K since you're doubling the frame rate of Xbox One X. But matching 4K and locked 30FPS is a piece of ca...
The Witcher 3 offers 1080p and averages about 45FPS if you watch the analysis by Digital Foundry. It's totally inconsistent which really isn't good for a racing game. Might be just about tolerable riding around on a horse in an adventure game, less so racing cars.
It's also less demanding than Forza Horizon 3, since it's exclusively an offline title and Horizon 3 pushes the base Xbox One very hard.
Soon as you add Horizon 3's netcode c...
Not a chance.
"if you think release is 2020, then you are absolutely bonkers to think 16tflops"
"But 16tflops wont be financially feasible for a console in 2022 let alone 2019."
Both these statements are incorrect. Mainly because as I stated, 7nm is due THIS YEAR for AMD's Vega refresh, and was confirmed only days ago on their road map. Secondly I did also point out late 2019 as the very earliest, realistically I know it would most likely be the...
PS4 is the bar. It's the biggest selling, and was the most powerful upon the start of this generation. It has therefore been the target of most developers to get their games running at 1080p on it.
Assuming that PS4 is the generation's baseline because of the above reasons then you need at least 4x the GPU performance of that machine to have all native 1080p PS4 games in native 4K. 1.84 TFLOPS x 4, round it off to 8 TFLOPS for a bit of overhead. Mark Cerny also said...
ARM was studied before PS4 as a potential CPU arch for this generation of consoles, alongside RISC and x86. In the end x86 won for performance, efficiency and cost. Now it finally has a foothold in consoles I doubt it will be going anywhere. It'll be the preference from here on in. Developers have never been happier about a decision than going with something so common and well understood. It helps keeps their costs lower and porting easier.
To that end you are left with...
Xbook? More like Xblock. Size of it!
Intel i7 + GTX1070 in a quality laptop is like ~$1500. Faster than this, $1000 less, rather more portable.
$2000 would get you a GTX1080 laptop, way faster!
Don't be surprised. There is a simple rule of thumb that states unless AMD is clearly better for the same price, Nvidia and Intel win since they are first choice.
This particularly applies to GPUs. Nvidia is the 'default' for developers in the industry and consumers in the shops. If the choice between an AMD GPU and an Nvidia one is close in a given price segment, then Nvidia easily wins and sells loads. The current example there is the GTX1060, which is not rea...
OTaylor: "Why would anyone choose PC over an X1X?"
Easy. Because it's better. It just is.
You can argue all day about how your new BMW is so great, it's got the biggest trunk space and the most practical for the family etc then someone rocks up in a new Ferrari and you know it's better. But it's 3 times the cost! Who cares. Everyone knows it is just better. It's pointless even discussing it.
When you accept...