It worked for The last of Us and Spiderman. Optimization through exclusivity allows the publishers to spend less time chasing down random bugs and rendering issues.
I’ll believe they made something on the same level as the competitors when the console actually comes out. An unreleased demo console is not something you should be using as a benchmark for how good the visuals are since the product will most likely go through a significant amount of changes in-between the demo and release.
Even then, there’s the chance that if the console is coming out a few days later, there is no guarantees they didn’t use an old demo console that is outdated compared to what will be released or wasn’t made specifically with the goal in mind of overselling the console by pouring resources into making the demo console actually better than the release one.
And it’s been true since the very first console. The Master System was more powerful than the NES, and the Genesis/Mega Drive was more powerful than the Super NES (arguably; the Sega CPU was far more powerful than Nintendo’s). Same is true for its portables.
They’ve always prioritized per-unit margins. It’s a conservative approach, but it means profit on every console sold.
So there’s a 0% chance this console is actually as powerful as a PS5. However, there’s a good chance there are hardware and software techniques being used to upscale a lower resolution image.
I absolutely believe that exclusivity can create a better product. A company can put more resources into a game if they’re more worried about making a system seller than a profit driver.
But I don’t think for a moment that it benefited the game by creating a focus for the developers by limiting the consoles.
Back in the day, console exclusivity meant you could take advantage of system-specific features such as the ridiculously powerful SIMD core in the PS3. Now, 2/3 major consoles have nearly identical hardware, and the third is an overclocked smartphone, so there's no real benefit to system lock-in.
Seriously, if they said this about the Switch, nobody would bat an eye. But it seems to be easier to simultaneously develop for PS5 and XBox Series than to develop for both consoles and PC, given how terrible a lot of PC ports are.
The appeal of Nintendo console is first party exclusives and whatever the new gimmick may be (I don’t mean that word as a bad thing, I have loved most of their gimmicks). Powerful hardware just means that it can potentially have a good third party support, so that you’re not left playing just the first party games.
Terrible title. “Switch 2 supports ray tracing and will use upscaling” is the summary. Which is obvious, it won’t be anywhere near consoles, it’s like 1/7th resolution.
That’s not what the article says, the values in the patent are an example. It’s not out of realm of possibility to have something that can match at least the Series S when docked while still supporting a portable mode.
Sure, it is a garbage patent anyway, the Steam Deck does upscaling when docked too, woohoo.
This hardware isn’t a mystery, it’s a newer mobile ARM SoC using a newer Nvidia architecture supporting RT and DLSS. It will run at a low resolution. Probably max of 1080p, probably plenty of 720p on more demanding games. All upscaled.
And to be clear that’s fine, it is what a Switch 2 was always going to be.
Does he? By now his brain may be addled enough for him to believe that. The guy's been Todd Howard for decades now and that's really got to wear on a person's mind.
Considering Microsoft forcing a year QA on them with the full MS QA team… yea I imagine the partnership and exclusivity did indeed yield a much less buggy and thus better product.
I don’t think current Respawn could pull it off, Titanfall 2 was lightning in a bottle with them begging EA to not have any DLC and Apex plays like shit compared to it with a predatory battle pass.
Been playing apex since launch. I've bought a total of 3 battle passes with actual money, it's super easy to just continue buying the battle pass off of the previous pass rewards. I have no love for the battle pass market but the apex one isn't one I'd call predatory. Game is free, battle pass is purely cosmetics you aren't forced into in any way. Aside from persistent audio issues apex plays really well for me.
I really love the game but optimisation and performance are a joke. I played it with 30fps on console and PC and it needs absurd amounts of power. Would it be even more worse with a multi release on PS5?
Yep, the linux driver issue is either crash on 535 or get a rock solid 26-31 FPS on 525 irrespective of settings with frame timings being so smooth you get a more pleasant experience chewing sand.
which is hilarious because the game plays better on a steam deck than on my 3080
Andrew Wilson and my personal definition of ‘very exciting’ likely differ greatly, so I’m not going to pay attention to anything until we see the products. I suspect he is very excited to make a lot of money on a bunch of new Star Wars games.
videogameschronicle.com
Aktywne