119

Larian has delayed the release of Baldur’s Gate 3, currently on pace to possibly be 2023’s Game of the Year, until they can figure out how to make split-screen work on Series S.

top 50 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[-] acastcandream@beehaw.org 39 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago)

 I have a series S and even I think it’s unreasonable to expect full parity with a PS5/XSX after three or four years. It’s a $300 piece of hardware - it is remarkable what it does at its price point. It will be useful for a good 10 years, but it will not be able to keep up with new games after 5 at most in my opinion. It’ll be great for Indies or back catalogs.

They need to stop trying to make it functionally a series X and focus more on making it a gamepass/xcloud machine. As it is, it’s just an albatross around their neck.

Edit: Everything signaled that they were going to make it into a xcloud machine essentially. I’m not sure why they haven’t really pushed that harder.

[-] stopthatgirl7@kbin.social 22 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago)

I feel like their planning for it was really shortsighted - like they were hoping to get a as many people to buy the console as possible so they could “win” the console war early by having more people adopt it by putting out a cheap console people who didn’t want to spend so much would be drawn to, and weren’t really thinking beyond the first few years of the generation. Maybe they figured once they had the lead, they cold get people up upgrade or something. By they didn’t get the early lead and now the cheaper console means devs can’t really fully develop for Xbox. This will only get worse as more games start getting developed.

[-] phillaholic@lemm.ee 20 points 1 year ago

Microsoft is terrible at Gaming. I fear how everyone seems to be ok with them buying companies up and putting games on GamePass. It's not going to end well. It's not even going well if you really take notice.

[-] acastcandream@beehaw.org 10 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago)

It’s going great for me as the consumer with Game Pass. I have had over two years of essentially free games, because Microsoft rewards is too generous and easy to exploit. But I have no illusions about whether or not this consolidation is good for the industry. It simply isn’t. Yeah I guess y’all can call me out or whatever for using it anyway, but the series S with nearly free GamePass has just been too good for me as a dad with a full-time job and children. I’m still against the merger lol

I vote with my dollar where I can, but sorry, sometimes I make compromises just like anybody else. That being said, if I have to start actually paying for it, even at the current price, I’m out. So basically it depends on when they decide they don’t want rewards to stay around.

[-] belated_frog_pants@beehaw.org 16 points 1 year ago

Its going great now. The monopoly they want is to increase charges on you and you have to pay forever to keep access. This is specifically the point of gamepass.

It may workout for you in the short rub, but you are still losing choice and value (you only rent access) in the process.

load more comments (5 replies)
load more comments (2 replies)
[-] Oneeightnine@feddit.uk 12 points 1 year ago

I think the problem they've given themselves is that they pushed it as a cheaper alternative to the X whilst also maintaining that it'll be able to play the same games.

How do they go about messaging that can't be the case going forward without pissing off those that spent the money on the S in the first place.

load more comments (6 replies)
[-] barely_aware@lemmy.dbzer0.com 21 points 1 year ago

I still don't really understand this. Local splitscreen on a game the size of baldurs gate does make sense to me as being a technical hurdle, obviously rendering the game world twice is extremely taxing.

I keep seeing complaints about other games also, lots off people seem to be blaming the Series S for Remnant 2s slow xbox patches.

The Series S is basically an X with a weaker GPU, how are games (that also release on PC) not scalable enough to run on the S at 1080p when they can run at 4k on the X? I'd love a technical answer, if I replace my 3080 with a 1060 I could run the game on my PC and a lower resolution/graphic settings. How is this different from the Series X/S? I'm not a programmer/developer and I'd really like if someone could explain too me why the Series S is a problem because from my view point it's lazy developers with unoptimised games

[-] HumbleFlamingo@beehaw.org 43 points 1 year ago

The Series S is basically an X with a weaker GPU

If it was just a GPU difference, you'd be right it should be easy to just run it less pretty. But the memory limitations are the real issue. The X has 16 GB of memory and the S has 10 GB. And worse, the memory performance is drastically different. The X has 10 GB that runs at 560 GB/s and 6 that runs at 336 GB/s, where as the S has 8 GB at 224 GB/s and 2 GB at 56GB/s. (I did not miss a zero on the last value)

[-] wizardbeard@lemmy.dbzer0.com 16 points 1 year ago

Holy crap that's an absurd kneecapping with the RAM. No wonder they're having parity issues

[-] jordanlund@lemmy.one 15 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago)

It has less RAM than the Xbox ONE X as well and is incapable of running backwards compatible games with Xbox One X enhancements.

https://www.videogameschronicle.com/news/xbox-series-s-likely-wont-be-able-to-run-xbox-one-x-content-its-claimed/

[-] Hdcase@beehaw.org 6 points 1 year ago

Holy shit I had no idea. The Xbox One X really is more powerful, at least in some regards, than a system that came out 3 years later.

load more comments (4 replies)
[-] magic_lobster_party@kbin.social 16 points 1 year ago

Split screen might be difficult for Series S due to memory constraints. Keep in mind that all assets both players are seeing must be loaded in memory simultaneously. This includes textures, models and animations. These assets are normally not loaded into the memory unless they’re visible by the camera. This becomes problematic if there are two cameras facing different parts of the map at the same time. Then you potentially need to double the memory requirements, which the Series S might not have.

[-] PenguinTD@lemmy.ca 11 points 1 year ago

did you think of the possibility that even Larian's low settings still can't run on series S? Given the amount of assets I saw it's actually quite possible that vram requirement are pretty high and that's why PS5 have delay as well so they can figure out ways to consolidate textures used etc. Like they can't even manage to let me stack rope or water bottle properly in inventory(maybe some asset id not cleaned up during development), so having excessive vram usage is fairly easy/common for content heavy games.

[-] Helvedeshunden@beehaw.org 7 points 1 year ago

Today’s Digital Foundry video suggests that this is far from the issue. Even the highest texture settings fit comfortably in 6 GB. IIRC it was around 4,5 - and consoles typically go for high rather than ultra settings.

load more comments (7 replies)
load more comments (11 replies)
load more comments (4 replies)
[-] jordanlund@lemmy.one 18 points 1 year ago

Something I've been saying since the beginning, nice that people are catching up...

FTA: "The Xbox Series S was cheaper, but lacked the horsepower of the more expensive Series X."

It's not just that, the Series S lacks the power of the PREVIOUS GEN Xbox One X. The RAM limitations makes it impossible for it to run backwards compatible titles with the Xbox One X enhancements. AND it doesn't have the 4K Blu Ray drive present in both the Xbox One S and Xbox One X.

https://www.videogameschronicle.com/news/xbox-series-s-likely-wont-be-able-to-run-xbox-one-x-content-its-claimed/

This is the first time a console developer has released a new machine less capable than equivalent machines in the prior generation.

load more comments (2 replies)
[-] twistedtxb@lemmy.ca 10 points 1 year ago

No Series S owner will be mad if a game has Series X specific exclusive content. MS is shooting itself in the foot

[-] narc0tic_bird@lemm.ee 19 points 1 year ago

I think people would be mad. Imagine you play a game at your friend's home on his Series X, and then proceed to buy the game so you can play multiplayer online, only to then have a certain features or game modes missing (say you get team death match but not battle royale because it uses too much memory).

It's not that easy to communicate feature disparity. Some people probably don't even know which Xbox they have.

[-] acastcandream@beehaw.org 10 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago)

At some point, it’s on you to know what your machine can and can’t handle. They put big letters on the front of each game telling you if it’s able to play on the series X and series S. It is right there lol. 

Also, with smart delivery, it would probably be trivial for Microsoft to have a modal pop up saying “this game is not optimized for series S and will not play, do you still want to purchase?”

No, the real issue here is developers (not their fault mind you). The moment Microsoft says “you don’t have to make it playable on the S,“ they simply won’t. Because why would you? 

[-] red@sopuli.xyz 6 points 1 year ago

A dev team is more likely to axe Xbox release or features. So because S won't have enough memory/gpu grunt, X won't be getting that feature either.

load more comments (11 replies)
[-] magic_lobster_party@kbin.social 11 points 1 year ago

Problem is that it can turn into a slippery slope. Where should MS draw the line if they start to allow Series X exclusive content? Can developers cut entire game modes from the S version if they just ask kindly enough? Or maybe ignore the S version completely? The risk is that developers are going to abuse this opportunity.

MS wants people to see the Series S as a viable purchase. Why should you buy it when you won’t be able to play the next big release in full?

[-] conciselyverbose@kbin.social 8 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago)

Yes, they should be able to say "this game doesn't run on series S" because it's significantly worse than the other options and it doesn't deserve the work it takes. It doesn't even have CPU parity, which is a much bigger deal than less GPU cores.

[-] magic_lobster_party@kbin.social 6 points 1 year ago

That will just betray all the customers who bought Series S. Will they upgrade to a Series X to play the next big thing? No, they will probably just buy a PS5 instead. Why should they continue to stay loyal with MS?

[-] conciselyverbose@kbin.social 9 points 1 year ago

It's not capable.

They might have made the bed and be stuck in it, but it was a bad plan that substantially sabatoges the actual next gen console.

load more comments (2 replies)
load more comments (4 replies)
[-] potato@lemmy.basedcount.com 9 points 1 year ago

Lazy devs don't understand what scaling is. They advertised this game as Steam Deck compatible which has a way weaker CPU, GPU, storage (most people are playing on an SD card), and most importantly memory bandwidth. This game runs perfectly fine on PCs with slower CPU/GPU combos than the Series S. It's literally just laziness and knowing people will just accept their shitty excuses.

[-] HellAwaits@lemm.ee 24 points 1 year ago

I always love when the ignorant calls other lazy for not understanding basic things about game development. They understand perfectly well what scaling is and they're not lazy. Have you played a single second of BG3? They're literally the opposite of lazy. You sound like a salty xbox fanboy.

[-] Blackmist@feddit.uk 10 points 1 year ago

Not sure you can accuse Larian of being lazy. When was the last time you saw a PC game work this flawlessly from launch?

It's the lack of RAM causing the issues apparently, rather than power. If they could cut the split screen mode from the S it would be fine, but they can't.

[-] ReadyUser30@beehaw.org 7 points 1 year ago

Larian have disabled split screen on the Steam Deck to account for that lower power. They can't do the same thing for the XBox S release because Microsoft demand feature parity with the X.

load more comments (4 replies)
load more comments (4 replies)
[-] Paterfamilias01@reddthat.com 6 points 1 year ago

Well this is concerning. I’ve got a PS5 and was going to buy a XSX this week so I could pre-order Starfield, now I might wait and see how this plays out. What’s going to happen with Starfield & Elder Scrolls 6 (whenever it’s released)? The Series S is going to fuck up everything.

[-] red@sopuli.xyz 8 points 1 year ago

Why do you think Halo never got split screen 💁‍♂️

load more comments (1 replies)
[-] Helvedeshunden@beehaw.org 6 points 1 year ago

There’s a difference between targeting 3-4 console SKUs and targeting 2. If you know what’s going to be your baseline from day 1, you test against that and scale up rather than the other way around. With a first party studio, this is a given.

[-] spacedogroy@feddit.uk 6 points 1 year ago

Honestly, it's kind of on the developer. If they'd taken the Series S as the base line during development, they would have made life a lot easier for themselves. I think Microsoft are right to stick to their guns. It will seriously piss off their consumers if they can't land good quality versions of equivalent games on PS5.

I actually think it could be more beneficial for players across both console platforms to encourage developers to build games which scale reasonably, and at the low end target a 30 FPS minimum frame rate whilst the Series S/PS5 get 60 FPS+ or improved image quality, or both. Instead of it just being a race to the bottom on performance just so we can have a little bit of ray tracing.

Also, as far as I'm aware, Baldurs Gate 3 hasn't released on PS5 and is not due until September. I will be very interested to see how that goes, because I think the conclusion of this article is premature until we see that.

[-] vrighter@discuss.tchncs.de 18 points 1 year ago

that doesn't mean we get better games on the xss, but that we get worse games on xsx and ps5. I paid for that power, I want my games to use it. I don't care that it doesn't run as well on a lesser console I deliberately chose not to buy because of its lesser power

[-] Hypx@kbin.social 17 points 1 year ago

If they’d taken the Series S as the base line during development, they would have made life a lot easier for themselves.

The problem is that the baseline is actually the PS5. It outsells both versions of the Xbox by a factor of 2. So the Xbox Series S is an afterthought, and always will be.

load more comments (2 replies)
[-] rafoix@kbin.social 12 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago)

The baseline system is almost always the most popular system. No developers should be hamstrung by MS’s bad business decisions.

I’m not sure that having BG3 run at 540p 30hz on the latest MS console will be good for Larian.

load more comments (1 replies)
[-] stopthatgirl7@kbin.social 10 points 1 year ago

The issue here isn’t frame rate or graphics, it’s that with the memory issues on the series S, they can’t get split screen to run. It runs just fine on X, but won’t on S. Because Xbox demands parity, they can’t just disable the feature like they did for Steamdeck.

[-] Reddit_Is_Trash@reddthat.com 8 points 1 year ago

If we take the series s as the baseline in development, we'll get games that don't take full advantage of the better hardware. They shouldn't have to make their game run on potato grade hardware. I think they hit a great balance, it runs great on most modern gaming pc's, and the series x and ps5 will have no issues running it either.

load more comments
view more: next ›
this post was submitted on 13 Aug 2023
119 points (100.0% liked)

Gaming

30500 readers
135 users here now

From video gaming to card games and stuff in between, if it's gaming you can probably discuss it here!

Please Note: Gaming memes are permitted to be posted on Meme Mondays, but will otherwise be removed in an effort to allow other discussions to take place.

See also Gaming's sister community Tabletop Gaming.


This community's icon was made by Aaron Schneider, under the CC-BY-NC-SA 4.0 license.

founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS