No we probably won't get games with the largest budget ever that is a fair guess. However you don't need even a tenth of the budget of SC to build your games around an SSD and a proper CPU and using that games budget as an argument is nothing but absurd.
It does not cost more to have a developer working with the limitations of a SSD and a basically off the shelf PC CPU in mind then a HDD and a Jaguar CPU which even DF said is unusable in a modern PC and in reality probably its significantly more costly to keep trying to push a game with new hardware as well as hardware that was outdated since forever and make both work and make it both look next gen and still playabl
People keep on pointing at SC as an example of what's possible when there is a focus on an SSD. The world and asset design is what makes the SSD a requirement. It took a lot of money to create this world (universe really) and assets. We're not getting first gen titles with that level of ambition.
Am I saying that games need to cost $200+ million to utilize the hardware? No, not at all. I'm just saying if we are going to be using examples, any examples at all, maybe we should also be trying to understand
why said game requires specific hardware. That way we could have a better understanding on what to expect or hope for in the future. That's why I'm happy Dictator spoke up because having a better understanding to how these games work is more important than using it as ammo in some stupid argument.
I'm going to ignore your comment on it being more expensive to support cross gen because it's irrelevant when the addressable market is different and it's nonsense when we see how PC games scale.
I was talking about launch. There are off course third party games also pushing what is possible on the consoles and they of course wants to look as pretty and interesting as possible so people picking up a new console will choose their game to take home with it. Their goal however is not to sell consoles that is the goal of launch first party games and make the new console look as attractive as possible showing off as much of the capabilities of the new system wether people pick that up at launch or later or never is not the primary goal.
I would think that it's every Studio's hope that their game pushes hardware sales since they all benefit from a larger pool of customers. Key difference here is 3rd parties are less likely to care about which sells more.
Both MS and Sony will have premiere titles to sell their consoles at launch. Every 3rd party title will also be showing off how their games utilize these systems the best they can. I get what you're saying but I don't think exclusives carry as much weight as you're saying unless it's a key title. If GoW2 was a cross gen launch game, that would likely be more important or more of a system seller than a new, unknown IP that was a next gen exclusive. The only way I see this changing is if these next gen exclusives stand head and shoulders above the rest of the pack in some amazing way and I don't see that happening.
Yes and the same thing will be done on PS5 for the games that are crossgen? It's not exclusive to Xbox.
Sony however and it's first party games can also show of those and the new gameplay mechanics and systems that literally is impossible to run on the old hardware and not just current gen games with next gen makeup.
I never said the same can't be done on the PS5. You're the one making an argument to how MS doesn't care to show off the capabilities of their next system and I'm telling you that they do. Keep in mind, if I say something positive about the Xbox or PS, it's not a slight at the other console. It's rarely an either or situation with me or in real life.
And the idea that only Sony's exclusives can bring us next gen gameplay is nothing more than a hypothetical that can't be proven. Unless they start bringing their games to PC and require similar hardware, which they won't, there is no way to prove these games can't be done on lesser hardware. It's no different than the nonsensical argument that game A can't be done on platform B that we saw during the PS360 generation. Unless these devs have tried to do it, how do we know?
And I was talking about Microsoft CEO and his letter to shareholders and not Booty so I don't even know how to answer that.
You claimed this is the "right move for Xbox because their main goal is not to sell hardware anymore" and I'm saying that has nothing to do with it when Booty's comment clearly explains why they are doing this. They do care about selling hardware, they just know they aren't going to sell it to late adopters so why not show them some support as well?
They off course wants people to buy Xbox but the investment in new studios and heavy subsidizing of Gamepass and Xcloud is to become the Netflix of gaming (once again like Nadella have claimed is their goal) and available on as many devices as possible and not to make people buy a XsX. The same reasoning is behind the no launch next gen only games they want content on many devices instead of using it to sell one. If that is an XsX they will of course happy since they will probably not sell the hardware at a loss or if they do probably make it profitable after a game purchase or two but it's their main goal and Nadella would probably put Gamepass on PS5 in a heartbeat if Sony allowed it.
Both MS and Sony probably have similar margins for their consoles, just like both will be fighting for the same pool of ~200 million console gamers. Just because MS is diversifying their reach, that doesn't mean they are any less in it to win it on hardware. Same goes for Sony who will surely be expanding more into services as this generation goes on and would certainly love to have PS Now on the Xbox of MS allowed it.
