@esmufc07 you gonna take that shit?
Gaming Xbox Series X|S
- Thread starter Bojan11
- Start date
Did I say much about Sony doing it? I don't remember.
I struggle to justify spending more than 40 on any game to be honest when there's so many games on subscriptions.
Does it really get much cheaper than Xbox with a Game Pass? I have Series X which was a bit more expensive than Series S but would probably be perfectly fine with the latter which would set me back €250 plus €40 a year for Game Pass while using the conversion trick. Is PC gaming much cheaper than this?
I'm not sure Elden Ring actually deserves the tag of being a finished product at launch, considering the various performance issues across all platforms, most notably stutter and frame pacing.
Its not going to cost much to build a pc with series s performance to be fair. Gamepass is pretty good value, but you dont need a console for it.
Fair. It worked perfectly for me on PC but a friend of mine had that awful stuttering and had to give up.
That's always the risk with PC games. Even the most well optimized games could potentially run like shit on a PC.
I don't recall any issues with performance on consoles.
There were definitely issues with the ps5 version to the point where people were installing the ps4 version instead.
I had PS5 version at launch and don't recall any issues. Either way it's such a minor thing and IMO no reason to baulk at paying for it.
Yeah reckon it would still be more than €250. They are selling them at a loss and I imagine Microsoft would have found a way to manufacture them cheaper if any random dude could build a PC of similar performance cheaper.
I haven’t owned a PC or a laptop in nearly 10 years so I don’t really know what they cost but that sounds very, very cheap.
I wont pay £70 for a game. Any game that costs that much I'll wait for a sale and play something else of GP.
I doubt you could buy a pc with series s specs unless you bought it second hand. You wont get a pc for 250 but you wont be paying for online access or 70+ for games and whatever you do get is going to have much better performance than a series s.
I dont think series s is competing with pc to be honest, its competing with streaming which costs nothing.
They weren't "issues" as I recall, it was just that the framerate jumped around whereas the ps4 version runs (on ps5) at a flawless 60fps. You get better visuals on the ps5 version (increased vegetation and such), but lower performance.
I played on the ps4 version as I preferred the stable framerate - its not like Elden Ring or any other FS games are standard bearers in the graphics department anyways.
And Microsoft are investing a lot in streaming so they do recognize that.
I think Series S is basically the sweet spot for a casual gamer that spends less than 10 hours a week on gaming. It's very cheap, has access to Game Pass so you will have virtually no costs after you buy the system and subscribe, for all the talk about holding this generation back it's also by far the easier access to this generation for a lot of people.
Xbox series S be like
Yeah it’s ideal for a few of my mates who have no interest in the best possible performance. They just want to jump on a game with mates every now and then.
Also it's not like those games look terrible on S. For an average gamer the perception will still be very positive.
Again, it's not "holding the generation back" as consoles do that anyway. Always have. It does stunt the way the games will go at the end game though (and no, no dumb video about how it actually effects the PS5 more changes that), but in reality none of us care about that anyway. None of us really care about digital game, streaming, loot boxes and all that. We just move on with the times and accept what's being given. So on that note:
The S is a great piece of kit, I genuinely like it. From a technical design perspective, the S and X are right up there and almost as close as the Gamecube as actual marvels of power vs form. It's a shame this gen is a wash really.
The S is a great piece of kit, I genuinely like it. From a technical design perspective, the S and X are right up there and almost as close as the Gamecube as actual marvels of power vs form. It's a shame this gen is a wash really.
Yeah its a good stop gap until streaming is more developed / reliable. 10 hours a week still sounds like a lot to be honest but i get your point.
The video didn't actually say that I was just being a dick
I know, I watched it you tool
Plus I'd never call DF dumb...well maybe occasionally (like when they talk about memory management, but that's just in general). Just a little cheeky bit of digging there
Plus I'd never call DF dumb...well maybe occasionally (like when they talk about memory management, but that's just in general). Just a little cheeky bit of digging there
Its OK you can admit you were wrong you knowI know, I watched it you tool
Plus I'd never call DF dumb...well maybe occasionally (like when they talk about memory management, but that's just in general). Just a little cheeky bit of digging there
The issue I have with buying a PC is that you have to upgrade every few years to keep up with the improved graphics. With a console you can atleast invest once and be able to play games at high graphics for more years without upgrading.
Playing some games on PC is certainly more fun but it's too expensive if you want to enjoy the highest graphics.
Series S is great in this way that you don't have to spend a lot.
Playing some games on PC is certainly more fun but it's too expensive if you want to enjoy the highest graphics.
Series S is great in this way that you don't have to spend a lot.
I can and very often do. I have a fiancée I have to.
But what specifically am I wrong about here?
Does she know you have no money and not long left?
Nope. That's an old myth that has never been true.
Consider this...why would you need to "upgrade" a PC when the consoles stay the same? Further to that, why when the new machines come out, would you need to "upgrade" all the parts in your PC past maybe the GPU? If you have the case, the memory, the PSU, the CPU, the motherboard...you know all the actual parts, why would you need to upgrade "every few years"? Then when you take into account the money you save via much cheaper games, the gamespass and factor in cool stuff like endless backwards compatibility.
I bought her a PS5 on a whim when you plebs were struggling for them. Didn't even need to spend over the top. I also had both an X and S in my hands before any of you either. Don't you worry about my status big man.
The latter part of your post is probably true. Damn.
Ooo Mr moneybags over here with his 3 consoles at 60
I don’t really see how consoles hold back PCs if most people don’t even have a top end one.
Seems like the developers hold back games more than the hardware because instead of reinvesting big profits in to making gaming something special they pump out the same level of stuff constantly.
Seems like the developers hold back games more than the hardware because instead of reinvesting big profits in to making gaming something special they pump out the same level of stuff constantly.
Where to begin...
You don't need a top PC to compete in any generation. You are talking about the greedy publishers. The same stuff is the stuff console players in general buy. Gaming was literally dumbed for consoles and made to suit from the off for mass sales. Sony then took that up a notch. Publishers then ramped that up massively. Mobile gaming then...
But in terms of tech, of course the consoles hold generations back. I mean FFS this gen's consoles don't even do raytracing on chip because AMD are idiots. Next releases will though.
Just not true. I upgrade the gfx and cpu about every 7 / 8 years and the rest when it breaks (hard drive is going on 16 / 17 years at this point). Unless the developer releases graphics options specifically for the craziest pc builds then i'm playing the game at max settings.
I've been short on cash so haven't upgraded my cpu in about 10 years now. It runs hot and loud but runs everything on the market.
Bit of a chicken and egg situation there. Theres no point in buying a top end pc because developers wont release games that make use of the power.
I used to play on a PC from around 2001-2006 (after which I went to uni and started using laptops, which shouldn't count in this discussion), back in the Nvidia GeForce days, and I felt unless I wanted to spend an insane amount of money once to buy the highest end GPU and RAM, I was having to buy larger ram slots to keep up with the latest games graphic performance. I remember not being able to run Doom 3 smoothly and having to think about buying a new card. I spent a moderate amount of my PC at that time.
For the same price, I could've bought a PS2 and enjoyed consistent performances without having to worry about upgrading.
Watching videos and listening to prices of graphic cards it feels the same today. A question I would ask is whether you can build a PC for 500 dollars that could play the latest games on high quality today and games 3-4 years down the line without having to upgrade (obviously there is more utility to a PC than just gaming that can be included in the price but just talking about gaming right now).
I probably built a PC just as you were bailing out and its changed a lot really. I think World of Warcraft came out around 2005 and being able to run it on more or less anything just changed how developers looked at pc's.
The highest end GPU is for people with 8k 3d tv's playing in vr. There will be about 2 games in the next 5 years that actually take advantage of that set up. Its niche.
Price depends heavily on the display your using. If you've got a 1080p tv that you dont plan to upgrade in the next 3/4 years you could probably scrape together a gaming pc for 500 dollars on sale. Theres a lot of once off costs that make that quite hard and unlikely.
500 dollars to turn your boring office computer with lots of utility into a gaming machine that'll last 10 years would be easy though.
XBox pretty much a no show at the game awards.... Surprised? A little....
Not really considering how monodimensional these awards are.
And also the lack of games.
Last edited:
Catching up on the latest, and I really don't think the MS/Activision deal is going to happen.
What will be the MS move if it falls through? I haven't got a clue. Except to say, I don't expect them to attempt to buy another publisher of that size.
What will be the MS move if it falls through? I haven't got a clue. Except to say, I don't expect them to attempt to buy another publisher of that size.
But if you wanted more impressive games that aren't 'held back by console' you would need to spend a pretty penny..
Not sure I follow what ray tracing has to do with holding back games? There's lots of games with ray tracing? Are you suggesting the quality of console hardware means they won't focus on it?
It's the innovation in graphics/sound/a.i held back in general.
I'm not arguing for any different though, I was a console gamer long before PC and will never not own them. But it's not the developers, it's more the publishers and also appetite of the consumers above all else. The consoles just lock us in for longer in a cycle.
My hope would be that instead of graphical enhancements, the next round has full RT and it's used for sound design/a.i above all else. Fat chance of that I know, but it would be nice!