ZycoFox

Trainee
CRank: 5Score: 42410

The only way it can be done (IMO) is if they can release a machine that can do something completely different to the other consoles, otherwise it'll just be another PS/Xbox like machine. What that would be, I don't know..

However with the AI we have today they could make a pretty amazing Seaman style game even now.

968d ago 2 agree0 disagreeView comment

@FinalFantasyFanatic

Indeed, keyboard and mouse is ideal for quite a few game types, like management/sim style games, RTS, first person, third person.

Then you have racing/fighting games etc which work better with a controller.

968d ago 1 agree0 disagreeView comment

If they release the same stuff again with little/no change except for graphics they can keep their next system.

969d ago 4 agree12 disagreeView comment

Yes but the new Cyberpunk DLC shows it can dip below 50fps on consoles as shown by DF, Starfield appears to be CPU bottlenecked hence locked at 30fps, otherwise it could be 60 then it might dip below 40 in some areas so it would kinda run not so good.

We'll see how well it performs on a more up to date CPU when DF or someone else does a frame rate test.

969d ago 3 agree37 disagreeView comment

Nintendo screwing people over due to lack of space, wonder how they'll gimp their next machine to piss people off.

970d ago 11 agree4 disagreeView comment

I would personally get bored after a short bit of playtime. I'd rather a Pilotwings style game with challenges. Just my opinion, I'd try this if I had a decent GPU (only on a 3060Ti rn) but honestly other than the graphics it doesn't interest me.

970d ago 1 agree3 disagreeView comment

Meh, rather put it towards a new GPU next year

971d ago 1 agree2 disagreeView comment

Big oof.. Games like Starfield already appear to be hitting a CPU bottleneck with the Series X. What are they gonna do when GPU demanding games come out? Lower the resolution and upscale even more?

I think they're good for another year or 2, the odd highly graphically intensive games excluded unless you like 30fps. PC would already be far and away a lot better choice if Nvidia hasn't screwed up the GPU tiers and pricing of this gen, if they make a comeback next year...

972d ago 0 agree0 disagreeView comment

These kinda games (FPS/third person/management/strategy) work better with keyboard & mouse anyways.

972d ago 2 agree10 disagreeView comment

Exactly, bar for the odd good release here and there, it's the same tired stuff over and over.

So many great games from N64 era etc that they don't bother with anymore.

But the fanbois lap it up, they can have it, just means I'm much less likely to buy their next machine.

973d ago 2 agree4 disagreeView comment

The Series X is CPU bottlenecked as much as the S. Poor optimization or just a demanding game, doesn't make a difference. It will run noticeably better on a decent more modern CPU on PC.

974d ago 14 agree0 disagreeView comment

And including GG versions of games instead of MS.

974d ago 0 agree1 disagreeView comment

There's nothing wrong with the games, but after most of them being very samey, I got a bit bored. I liked MKDS because it added a mission mode, yeah it didn't have maybe as many as I'd like but it was decent for variety.

I really prefer the new Mario Party for the different types of games in it.

Mario Kart doesn't really feel fresh because you know what to expect for every new game pretty much. The single player mode of DKR was far more in...

975d ago 2 agree1 disagreeView comment

If a game is demanding on the CPU it makes no difference if the CPU is the bottleneck anyway, in turn causing frame rate dips, most here obviously do not understand this simple point. This is why both Series X and Series S are 30fps locked.

You twisted my previous comment to say that I was saying Series S is as powerful as the X.. Yeah nice try. Maybe don't argue over things you don't understand.

977d ago 2 agree5 disagreeView comment

@Crows90

No.. The Series X has a more powerful GPU, the CPU is the bottleneck, if it's poor optimisation or just a demanding game, makes no difference, if it's hard on the CPU then that's what's going to cause dips in frame rate.

Pointless arguing this as most obviously don't get it.

977d ago 3 agree11 disagreeView comment

@just_looken

Instead of making up something I never said, read what I said again. I said those CPUs would likely run the game noticeably better (than console) who said anything about not being able to play the game on lesser hardware?

Wish people would stop making up nonsense I never even said.

977d ago 14 agree18 disagreeView comment

@darthv72 Yeah I've noticed some people have awful grammar these days. Don't know the difference between then & than, loose & lose, being & been. I mean I'm nowhere near perfect in grammar but even I know the difference between the basics. I see this happen often on forums etc.. Even from people that only know English!

977d ago 5 agree14 disagreeView comment

The Series X is running a 2 generations older CPU than on desktop, and it runs at 3.8GHz, on PC boost is well over 5GHz on newer chips so that with the IPC on top because it's a newer chip (stronger clock for clock) means the game will likely run noticeably better on Intel Alder Lake 12 Gen and newer CPUs, and of course newer AMD chips.

DF said: "With all of the CPU demands that this sort of a game entails then, dropping the resolution might not have much of an eff...

977d ago 13 agree40 disagreeView comment

Isn't the Switch successor only gonna be a little better or similar to the Series S? It's gonna struggle with multiplats just after a couple/few years like the Switch. Even more so than a regular console.

978d ago 0 agree1 disagreeView comment

If that's the case then the Switch successor will only have 1-2 years of slightly nerfed multiplats before they end up in a similar situation as the Switch now, that is to say lackluster performance.

978d ago 0 agree0 disagreeView comment