Would it suprise you if let's say by E3 Lockhart is dead again?
-
Ever wanted an RSS feed of all your favorite gaming news sites? Go check out our new Gaming Headlines feed! Read more about it here.
-
We have made minor adjustments to how the search bar works on ResetEra. You can read about the changes here.
Kotaku: Microsoft Is Still Planning A Cheaper, Disc-Less Next-Gen Xbox
- Thread starter Spectromixer
- Start date
Would it suprise you if let's say by E3 Lockhart is dead again?
Tom posted an article with a bit more detail.
https://www.theverge.com/2019/12/4/...ect-scarlett-lockhart-anaconda-launch-details
From what I see here, the massive bottleneck outlined will not be apparent. The CPU is unlikely to be clocked massively lower and the CPU and SSD are the biggest jumps to next gen.
The architecture switch may actually be important. Xbox One having a much smaller base makes an architecture break much easier. I see a lot of comments about Sony making next gen games starting with PS5, but I highly doubt they would stop making games for the PS4/Pro given the 100+ million install base. I could see continued PS4/Pro development being an achilles for PS5 more so than Xbox.
Simply removing the disc doesn't magically cut $200 off the price. "cater to" ffs you make it sound like game scalability isn't a thing that's been a part of pc's forever.
Jason's article states that Lockhart is much less powerful than Anaconda/PS5 and that some devs are worried it'll hamper their next gen ambitions. That's really all you need to know.
WHy are they going to have to cater to weaker hardware...that simply doesnt happen. Are you saying the ps4 was heald back due to the xbox one......Doom was held back becuase it came out on the switch???
Games will be ported down to lockhart not the other way around.
If I was a Dev and this was MSs strategy I would havea discussion with them to ensure that this direction will not be allowed to tarnish our vision ona project.
The Dev should be able to make the game they want. MS should have to look after porting down to the console in most cases, or create tools for it. It's not fair to do anything else otherwise.
That's all i need to know to not give a shit about a few anonymous quotes, sure.
Thanks. Hopefully that means developers will be able to maximize the scope of their games on Anaconda and PS5 and then simply dial back the graphics settings and resolution to get it on Lockhart. Tbh Lockhart appeals to me, I'm not interested in upgrading to 4K anytime soon.
Xbox One X was designed to play Xbox One games in 4K.
Lockhart's goal is to play Scarlett games at 1080p.
Yeah and those same devs also don't know details on what Lockhart means. Next gen will be defined by the CPU and SSD. A developer having to turn down resolution from 4k to 1440 and graphic settings to medium should not make them pull their hair out.
I have yet to hear someone explain to me how having a lower setting GPU will be the Achilles heel of the generation. If the box can't run something it doesn't get it turned on.
So I'm guessing... after seeing this... https://www.resetera.com/threads/di...-review-image-quality-better-than-ps4.157022/ the Switch held back the PS4 version? /s
The devs in Jason's article dont even know what they're talking about comparing, a 4tf RDNA2 gpu to the pro is embarrassing. Not to mention the SSD/CPU upgrade
This means no 1080p games on the stronger Xbox that really push graphics basically
stronger Xbox will just be higher resolution games of the weaker xbox
As a developer I'll tell you why I absolutely hate the idea of Lockhart.
When you go into the next generation of any console, it is always a premium buy-in. Some are ready day one to pay whatever price for next gen, whether that's $399 or $599.
Let's talk about $599. The PS3 did not launch at $599. It launched at $499, with a SKU that was the same base hardware but lesser hard drive space, no extra media slots, and a few other extras that didn't make the cut. Growth of the PS3 didn't start happening until a new $499 SKU was introduced that had more limited backwards compatibility and features.
Think about that for a minute: why would sales growth occur at $499 when the system launched at $499 to begin with? Because the new $499 system wasn't marketed as an "inferior" step down from the $599 version. It was the new PS3 SKU going forward. And because of that, people perceived the price at $499. Then we had the $399 PS3, and so on.
Microsoft wants it all, day one. They want the premium super hardware buyers. They want the soccer moms. They want the kids who only get one big gift per year. They want the busy traveler that can only game in the cloud. They want the subscription junkie that only plays through Game Pass. They think they can get there with two SKUs: one super premium console that's maybe $499 and one lesser console for $399. The market won't see the $399 console because again, the next gen buy-in at launch is ALWAYS PREMIUM. The perception will be the high end SKU is the true next gen console, and it won't be until that one declines in price that you'll see a bigger audience coming into the Xbox ecosystem.
The ramifications for a lesser SKU are huge, just like the Xbox Core/Arcade. You're already seeing that now with Xbox One X/S- some recent games like the Outer Worlds look worse on XB1X than PS4 Pro because they're upscaled ports of XB1S. You will see a LOT of that if there are two SKUs on the market, guaranteed. The premium Xbox will be a worse console because of the existence of Lockhart. Meanwhile, the PS5 has nothing other than itself to scale for, and that's huge.
But wait you say, Apple does this with the iPhone Pro and the standard colorful iPhones! You cannot bring the phone market into the console one. The comparison makes no sense. Eventually, at some point, you will need a new phone. You need it to basically live in this day and age. Sony and MS already have an uphill battle marketing and selling next gen because of the PS4 Pro and XB1X. It will be more difficult showing off amazing looking games because we're already playing amazing looking games. They have to get there with features, with quality of life features, with things that will cause this next gen to be a much slower start than I think this gen was. When your main selling point is less features at a lower price with Lockhart, you have a severe problem.
I hope they don't do this. This feels like marketing and executives meddling in the video game space. It feels aimless and stupid.
When you go into the next generation of any console, it is always a premium buy-in. Some are ready day one to pay whatever price for next gen, whether that's $399 or $599.
Let's talk about $599. The PS3 did not launch at $599. It launched at $499, with a SKU that was the same base hardware but lesser hard drive space, no extra media slots, and a few other extras that didn't make the cut. Growth of the PS3 didn't start happening until a new $499 SKU was introduced that had more limited backwards compatibility and features.
Think about that for a minute: why would sales growth occur at $499 when the system launched at $499 to begin with? Because the new $499 system wasn't marketed as an "inferior" step down from the $599 version. It was the new PS3 SKU going forward. And because of that, people perceived the price at $499. Then we had the $399 PS3, and so on.
Microsoft wants it all, day one. They want the premium super hardware buyers. They want the soccer moms. They want the kids who only get one big gift per year. They want the busy traveler that can only game in the cloud. They want the subscription junkie that only plays through Game Pass. They think they can get there with two SKUs: one super premium console that's maybe $499 and one lesser console for $399. The market won't see the $399 console because again, the next gen buy-in at launch is ALWAYS PREMIUM. The perception will be the high end SKU is the true next gen console, and it won't be until that one declines in price that you'll see a bigger audience coming into the Xbox ecosystem.
The ramifications for a lesser SKU are huge, just like the Xbox Core/Arcade. You're already seeing that now with Xbox One X/S- some recent games like the Outer Worlds look worse on XB1X than PS4 Pro because they're upscaled ports of XB1S. You will see a LOT of that if there are two SKUs on the market, guaranteed. The premium Xbox will be a worse console because of the existence of Lockhart. Meanwhile, the PS5 has nothing other than itself to scale for, and that's huge.
But wait you say, Apple does this with the iPhone Pro and the standard colorful iPhones! You cannot bring the phone market into the console one. The comparison makes no sense. Eventually, at some point, you will need a new phone. You need it to basically live in this day and age. Sony and MS already have an uphill battle marketing and selling next gen because of the PS4 Pro and XB1X. It will be more difficult showing off amazing looking games because we're already playing amazing looking games. They have to get there with features, with quality of life features, with things that will cause this next gen to be a much slower start than I think this gen was. When your main selling point is less features at a lower price with Lockhart, you have a severe problem.
I hope they don't do this. This feels like marketing and executives meddling in the video game space. It feels aimless and stupid.
Tom's last comment and the list of rumoured dev kit specs does makes me consider if this could be the current situation.
They can then have a "budget" machine in the same power class as PS5 and a premium 4K 60fps machine. Kind of like we had core/premium 360 and we now have IPhone XR and XS.
I would've considered trading my one x for a lockheart. But that's not happening without a disc drive.
If you honestly think a 4 to 11-12 tflops discrepancy won't bring about consessions, especially if thoes high-end machines are pushed go their limits, I don't know what to tell you.
1440p isn't the worst thing in the world.
The bigger issue is what if devs already planned to target the higher spec machine for lower res gameplay then checkerboard up to 4k, using all that extra processing power for extra raytracing and other enhancements?
You sort of force them to use the overhead on resolution or framerate and not much else. That's the biggest potential loss with this news.
4k isn't that big of a deal... but using all that extra GPU power to help what is assumed to be an already capable CPU to perform essential gameplay related functions could have really been a boon to developers.
Relegating the overhead over the base console to just resolution or maybe framerate is such a waste. But now it's sort of mandatory... just like it is on PS4 Pro and Xbox One X.
The bigger issue is what if devs already planned to target the higher spec machine for lower res gameplay then checkerboard up to 4k, using all that extra processing power for extra raytracing and other enhancements?
You sort of force them to use the overhead on resolution or framerate and not much else. That's the biggest potential loss with this news.
4k isn't that big of a deal... but using all that extra GPU power to help what is assumed to be an already capable CPU to perform essential gameplay related functions could have really been a boon to developers.
Relegating the overhead over the base console to just resolution or maybe framerate is such a waste. But now it's sort of mandatory... just like it is on PS4 Pro and Xbox One X.
Last edited:
What if Lockhart is specifically designed for their data centers and devs have kits so they can run that as a streaming version vs the full local version?
Wh would a console with a lesser gpu bring concessions to the head platform? Lockhart will see the concessions not scarlett.
Most likely they are more or less the same as they come from different generations.
Do any video games utilize GPU compute? I thought GPU compute was tied to significant number crunching and wasn't ever tapped into for gaming applications.
Happy to see where its been used before.
I'm not hearing $399 for Lockhart if it is a consumer product it'll be $299 at most.
No it'll be worse than 5500, which is 5.2 Tflops. More like RX 570.
It literally doesn't matter what price it is. That's the whole point.
If lockhart is aiming for 1440p for 4k anaconda content , a 1440p game on ps5/scarlett should be doable at 1080p with out to many comprises.
The only way to use the console is with an online connection, and it still sold tremendously. Shows the environment for digital future is here or very close.
The CPU seems to be less capable than the one in Scarlett, according to the article. Sure, much better than current gen, but that's not much of an achievement. I hope It's at least close.
Im sorry, but could you expand? I know about GPU compute but I can't think of a single game that was GPU bound when trying to simulate AI or something like that.
What games do you know that use GPU computing where a strong GPU is essential for the game to work?
Because just cutting the disc drive doesn't cut the cost of build enough.
I really have some flashbacks on how PS neo was received on the old place.
I wish people were more open minded to something new in the industry because right now we just don't know how it will turn out.
I wish people were more open minded to something new in the industry because right now we just don't know how it will turn out.
This is kinda like releasing a PS4 and
PS4 pro at the same time
except the jump from last gen is a lot smaller
microsofts base line gpu is increasing from 1.3 Tflops to 4 Tflops, that's not a very large jump from one gen to another
PS4 pro at the same time
except the jump from last gen is a lot smaller
microsofts base line gpu is increasing from 1.3 Tflops to 4 Tflops, that's not a very large jump from one gen to another
Looks like its the same CPU with a slower clock. How much slower is TBD, but I can't imagine significantly slower. They want the same structure but likely the CPUs that didn't make Scarlett on clocks.
Lockhart will be way more powerful than the X. The reason for this is already in the thread.
The devs that have voiced concerns (and presumably with devkits in hand) over this shackling their ambitions are better placed to judge the impact of this, hence the worry.
Holy shit what happened that made this thread 15 pages?
Wish this was like Blizzard's forums were I can read an abridged summary of what transpired.
If it's same power as the 4k UHD version I'll just go discless. I'll always have the X or PS5 For UHD movies.
Wish this was like Blizzard's forums were I can read an abridged summary of what transpired.
If it's same power as the 4k UHD version I'll just go discless. I'll always have the X or PS5 For UHD movies.
videogames use gpu compute extremely heavily -- but still mostly just to make things pretty (superficial cloth sim, cached vertex animations, cosmetic destruction, etc)
Would that of been really so bad though?
That's not much different to the x1 specs, and uncharted 4 ran at 60fps at 900p in mp, I don't see why Sony games and 3rd party could of been 720p @1tf
The console market is becoming more PC like and I think this last generation has started to condition people to that reality. The fact that we had two tier consoles now will help make this more acceptable moving forward into the next generation. I don't think conceptually there's anything wrong with trying to appeal to a wider and broader audience. This should actually be a good thing and we shouldn't have to be making it only cater to the hardcore elite. Building a wider audience and install base more quickly seems in general like a good thing and I don't think you can use the past history of consoles here to say it's a bad thing when we've already opened that door with mid generation consoles and having two levels of hardware for a current gen platform available.
