VG24/7: Developers making Xbox Series X games will learn to address PS5’s SSD advantage, says ex-Xbox lead

[RivalGT]

XSX games will be like the splinter cell ports on ps2. Or I guess Mgs2 would be a better example, PS2 being a fill rate monster, resulting in the Xbox port not running so well in the rain sections. Given that both systems have an SSD, I can't see there being a huge difference, even if one SSD is twice as fast. PS5 will just be easier to develop for, and Xbox will require more work from devs to get similar results.

 

[Steve McQueen]

It'll all come down to exclusives, regardless of power.

 

[Hockeymac18]

The areas that the XSX are stronger in do not allow for the same sort of revolution in game design that the storage solution does. Yes the XSX may have the beefier GPU, but it's comparatively easy for developers to just lower the resolution for a weaker GPU.

Click to shrink...

Do we know that the XSX's HDD is not capable of those revolutionary game design choices? And do we know that the PS5's weaknesses in other areas won't be noticeable?

I actually think the differences will be a lot smaller than a lot of people are hyping them to up to be. Remember, the XSX HDD is still going from mb/s to gb/s speeds.

 

[TheNerdyOne]

VRS saves compute (and other GPU resources - sampler resources, memory bandwidth etc), but it doesn't compensate for data that's not in memory. If you're memory bound - if the higher quality data isn't in memory - you can't draw/sample it.

Click to shrink...

Is everyone just forgetting the fact that on the xbox, only the visible portions of any texture are actually loaded rather than the entire file? ultra high resolution textures are easily the single largest part of the dataset for a modern AAA game (outside of things like video files), so if you only have to physically load in half as much data to achieve identical quality, your effective bandwidth is doubled. As far as we know, the entire texture has to be loaded into memory on playstation (and pc for now) to be worked with, unless they have developed their own equivalent to microsoft's patented proprietary technology and just forgot to mention it.

 

[gofreak]

Is everyone just forgetting the fact that on the xbox, only the visible portions of any texture are actually loaded rather than the entire file? ultra high resolution textures are easily the single largest part of the dataset for a modern AAA game (outside of things like video files), so if you only have to physically load in half as much data to achieve identical quality, your effective bandwidth is doubled. As far as we know, the entire texture has to be loaded into memory on playstation (and pc for now) to be worked with, unless they have developed their own equivalent to microsoft's patented proprietary technology and just forgot to mention it.

Click to shrink...

Sampler feedback will be available in RDNA2 (and so, likely PS5) and existing RTX cards. The 'patented proprietary' bit Microsoft added for Xbox is a texture filter for filtering on texture boundaries - nothing to do with the feedback that might inform more selective mip loading.

That aside, at the end of the day, whatever the effect of their respective stacks on top of raw storage performance, multiple devs have indicated PS5's solution is much faster. I'm sure they're aware of all each is offering.

 

[Hermii]

95% of third party games will be made for PCs with at best a much slower SSD than Xbox as their lowest common denominator anyway.

 

[MrKlaw]

I'm curious on all the 'patented' stuff MS has. They're very good at obfuscating basic features making them sound proprietary - Like sampler feedback. But At the same time, Sony hasn't done anything to head that off by simply saying 'yes we have sampler feedback, yes we have VRS' - we are still speculating based on what we expect if vanilla RDNA2

likewise I'd like to know how complete a solution direct storage is on PC. I don't expect it to remove all bottlenecks as a software solution, but if it can overcome some of the inherent file system limits on PC that will be a big step forward

 

[jroc74]

I'm curious on all the 'patented' stuff MS has. They're very good at obfuscating basic features making them sound proprietary - Like sampler feedback. But At the same time, Sony hasn't done anything to head that off by simply saying 'yes we have sampler feedback, yes we have VRS' - we are still speculating based on what we expect if vanilla RDNA2

likewise I'd like to know how complete a solution direct storage is on PC. I don't expect it to remove all bottlenecks as a software solution, but if it can overcome some of the inherent file system limits on PC that will be a big step forward

Click to shrink...

Yeah, its like the Velocity Architecture. Sony's version of that wont have some fancy name.

 

[Rosebud]

I would be shocked if most third party developers would not just develop their games for the lowest common denominator. I mean, there's literally 0 chance that levels will get changed just because the PS5 can load them faster

Click to shrink...

I agree but is very disappointing that this is the case. At least they can go crazy with first party I guess.

 

[one]

The reconstruction tech proven by PS4 Pro showed the resolution cannot be a differentiator in the new gen. Instead XSX should leverage computer shaders for things that are not simple upres like shown in UE5, but the 16% diff with PS5 might not be enough to make a tangible impact.

 

[MrKlaw]

Do we know that the XSX's HDD is not capable of those revolutionary game design choices? And do we know that the PS5's weaknesses in other areas won't be noticeable?

I actually think the differences will be a lot smaller than a lot of people are hyping them to up to be. Remember, the XSX HDD is still going from mb/s to gb/s speeds.

Click to shrink...

If XSX is 4.8GB/s - sustained, end to end, delivered to memory, with little/no CPU/GPU impact

vs

ps5 8-9Gb/s

then I can't imagine much difference at least with third party games

we may need to wait for games and/or developer info to understand that though. Does xsx have limitations getting that raw speed from SSD into memory that has knock on impacts to performance?

 

[Hermii]

The reconstruction tech proven by PS4 Pro showed the resolution cannot be a differentiator in the new gen. Instead XSX should leverage computer shaders for things that are not simple upres like shown in UE5, but the 16% diff with PS5 might not be enough to make a tangible impact.

Click to shrink...

I think just looking at the difference in teraflops is reductionist and kinda pointless. Certain workloads will run faster on PS5, and others will run faster on X.

Even if the teraflop count was identical, actual performance would be very different due to Xbox having a lot more CUs. and PS5 having insane clock speed.

 

[Pancracio17]

95% of third party games will be made for PCs with at best a much slower SSD than Xbox as their lowest common denominator anyway.

Click to shrink...

Yes. It will take a while for third parties to even get to SSDs like the XSX as minimun spec. Though I guess firsy party games can go nuts. Especially Sonys since those dont need PC ports.

 

[thomasmahler]

The wondrous thing here is that we've seen this exact same thing in the past, but people are still building castle in the sky ideas about what'll happen this time around. The PS3 on paper was quite a bit more powerful than the X360 - IF you chose to fully indulge in their hardware choices, use all the SPUs, etc. But there was a lot of cost and development time involved with that. So what did Third Party's do? They completely ignored the extra potential power the PS3 might have had and instead opted for developing the same game across multiple platforms: PC, X360, PS3 at the time.

Now, don't get me wrong, I'd love for the SSD speeds the PS5 will apparently have to be the standard for all devices, but that just won't be the case. So my guess is that we'll see the PS5 winning in terms of loading times and the X1SX usually featuring higher resolutions and / or better framerates. And then it's up to gamers to decide what's more important to them. But will third party devs significantly alter their games to fully make use of one particular hardware config? No, of course not. It's hard enough to design great levels as it is, the last thing you want as a developer is to now having to change content just because potentially on some hardware you could stream things in instead of showing a loading screen. The more realistic thing to have happen here is that most third party devs will still opt to show the loading screen, but it'll take 5 seconds for X1SX to load the next batch of content, whereas the PS5 only needs 3 seconds. That's it.

 

[christocolus]

The wondrous thing here is that we've seen this exact same thing in the past, but people are still building castle in the sky ideas about what'll happen this time around. The PS3 on paper was quite a bit more powerful than the X360 - IF you chose to fully indulge in their hardware choices, use all the SPUs, etc. But there was a lot of cost and development time involved with that. So what did Third Party's do? They completely ignored the extra potential power the PS3 might have had and instead opted for developing the same game across multiple platforms: PC, X360, PS3 at the time.

Now, don't get me wrong, I'd love for the SSD speeds the PS5 will apparently have to be the standard for all devices, but that just won't be the case. So my guess is that we'll see the PS5 winning in terms of loading times and the X1SX usually featuring higher resolutions and / or better framerates. And then it's up to gamers to decide what's more important to them. But will third party devs significantly alter their games to fully make use of one particular hardware config? No, of course not. It's hard enough to design great levels as it is, the last thing you want as a developer is to now having to change content just because potentially on some hardware you could stream things in instead of showing a loading screen. The more realistic thing to have happen here is that most third party devs will still opt to show the loading screen, but it'll take 5 seconds for X1SX to load the next batch of content, whereas the PS3 only needs 3 seconds. That's it.

Click to shrink...

Interesting comment. I think the part highlighted is what most devs will opt for and a difference of 2 - 5 secs won't be that big of a deal IMO. can't wait to see how it all plays out next gen. Thanks thomasmahler

 

[LAA]

Eh, I can't see design differing that much between the two versions, if a developer had the luxury to, if they had a particular vision which XSX couldn't handle, they'd probably opt for just making it for PS5 and PC if possible. For major 3rd parties though, they'd want it on everything, if anything, the PS5 and XSX would both have "elevators", which would be a shame for the PS5 version if it could handle not needing that. I just can't see developers opting to change design of their levels between two console versions.
It is going to be interesting how things go this gen though, XSX seems to be the more powerful on paper, and the PS5 seems to have the faster SSD, it'll be very interesting to see how multiplat games perform on the two.

 

[Hermii]

Eh, I can't see design differing that much between the two versions, if a developer had the luxury to, if they had a particular vision which XSX couldn't handle, they'd probably opt for just making it for PS5 and PC if possible. For major 3rd parties though, they'd want it on everything, if anything, the PS5 and XSX would both have "elevators", which would be a shame for the PS5 version if it could handle not needing that. I just can't see developers opting to change design of their levels between two console versions.
It is going to be interesting how things go this gen though, XSX seems to be the more powerful on paper, and the PS5 seems to have the faster SSD, it'll be very interesting to see how multiplat games perform on the two.

Click to shrink...

I don't see a game coming out for PC that the Xbox SSD can't handle in a very long time. Even the Xbox SSD is fairly high end with much better effeciency than what PCs currently have. Even if the Velocity architecture is not as good as PS5 custom IO hardware, its miles above PCs.

 

[alienNnja]

"I'll say two things with that. One, I understand that it's a marketing point and a high point – and I think I said in the last podcast we did, I'm really impressed with what they've done in the architecture with their drive and I think they'll be able to do really cool stuff with it," said Stillwell.

"I also don't think it's as impressive over what you'll be able to do [with Xbox Series X] and so I have high confidence in that team. I will also say – look I reserve the right to wake up smarter tomorrow and someone may prove me wrong and we'll learn. The one thing I have learned is [to] never underestimate game developers' [ability] to take advantage of something and work around it, but that works on both sides.

Click to shrink...

I'm glad to see someone else actually read the article!

 

[petermarinus]

The more realistic thing to have happen here is that most third party devs will still opt to show the loading screen, but it'll take 5 seconds for X1SX to load the next batch of content, whereas the PS3 only needs 3 seconds. That's it.

Click to shrink...

PS3>>>> X1SX confirmed :P

 

[Iztok]

Bigger question is PCs and their slow hardrives. :)

PC is now the min spec with regards to load times.

Click to shrink...

Depends on your setup. It's entirely possible to have faster than PS5 drives if you throw enough money at it on PC.
Hell you could just RAM drive the whole thing.

On average though, yes for sure, PC users, at PS5 launch, will be behind by a lot.
But that can change very fast, because that's how PC works.

 

[Iztok]

PC SSD drives are no where near the ones in the PS5.

Click to shrink...

PS5 SSD is nowhere near that either, as it's not out yet.
So that's a bit of a useless argument, isn't it.

The real advancements are the speeds between SSD and the rest of the system, not the SSD itself, anyway.

 

[petermarinus]

Depends on your setup. It's entirely possible to have faster than PS5 drives if you throw enough money at it on PC.
Hell you could just RAM drive the whole thing.

On average though, yes for sure, PC users, at PS5 launch, will be behind by a lot.
But that can change very fast, because that's how PC works.

Click to shrink...

Not really, having recently reinstalled the original deus ex, you would expect it to load in 0.2 seconds but the reality is different :)

 

[LordHellebore]

PS5 SSD is nowhere near that either, as it's not out yet.
So that's a bit of a useless argument, isn't it.

Click to shrink...

It doesn't really matter. The PS5 access's content in a specific way to allow for such speeds as well. Third party publishers will design games to run on the lowest spec, which for next-gen for the foreseeable future will be the PC (not to mention cross over titles with the current gen). You will only really see the SSD being used for game design reasons on first party titles.

 

[Iztok]

It doesn't really matter. The PS5 access's content in a specific way to allow for such speeds as well. Third party publishers will design games to run on the lowest spec, which for next-gen for the foreseeable future will be the PC (not to mention cross over titles with the current gen). You will only really see the SSD being used for game design reasons on first party titles.

Click to shrink...

Right, no argument there.
I can't wait to see what PS5 exlusives do with this tech.

And obviously 3rd parties won't design their PC ports with $10k storage setups in mind.

 

[Hermii]

Right, no argument there.
I can't wait to see what PS5 exlusives do with this tech.

And obviously 3rd parties won't design their PC ports with $10k storage setups in mind.

Click to shrink...

PC theoretical SSD speeds are just that: Theoretical. What we need on PC is a software and hardware suite to get better efficiency from SSDs. Cause it doesn't matter how fast the actual drive is, as long as efficiency sucks.

 

[thomasmahler]

PS3>>>> X1SX confirmed :P

Click to shrink...

Oops. I meant PS5, obviously :)

 

[GranularCement]

What worries me about the PS5's theoretical SSD speeds of ~20g/s is that games AAA games are anywhere from 50 to 100 gigs right now, so we're looking at 3 to 5 seconds of gameplay. It's too fast!

 

[CanisMajoris]

Faster I/O can be used in many ways, e.g. increased visual fidelity with better asset/texture quality and variety. Loading times is not a major selling point of PS5 setup as Cerny mentioned. Engines will scale to different I/O configurations and stating that multi-platform devs will not utilize better performing ones for parity is premature.

Is it going to be used for radically different approaches to game design? no, that's going to be a first party privilege, but UE5 already utilizes it for novel techniques that can be noticeably improved with increased bandwidth and lower latency and can still scale down to less performant options.

 

[Papacheeks]

The wondrous thing here is that we've seen this exact same thing in the past, but people are still building castle in the sky ideas about what'll happen this time around. The PS3 on paper was quite a bit more powerful than the X360 - IF you chose to fully indulge in their hardware choices, use all the SPUs, etc. But there was a lot of cost and development time involved with that. So what did Third Party's do? They completely ignored the extra potential power the PS3 might have had and instead opted for developing the same game across multiple platforms: PC, X360, PS3 at the time.

Now, don't get me wrong, I'd love for the SSD speeds the PS5 will apparently have to be the standard for all devices, but that just won't be the case. So my guess is that we'll see the PS5 winning in terms of loading times and the X1SX usually featuring higher resolutions and / or better framerates. And then it's up to gamers to decide what's more important to them. But will third party devs significantly alter their games to fully make use of one particular hardware config? No, of course not. It's hard enough to design great levels as it is, the last thing you want as a developer is to now having to change content just because potentially on some hardware you could stream things in instead of showing a loading screen. The more realistic thing to have happen here is that most third party devs will still opt to show the loading screen, but it'll take 5 seconds for X1SX to load the next batch of content, whereas the PS3 only needs 3 seconds. That's it.

Click to shrink...

I guess my question to you is, then why did EPIC RE-CODE their engine to take advantage of high SSD speeds after meeting with Sony a while back? I think engines if we see anything this summer from big publishers or even lets say next GDC all showing updated engines utilizing not just the ssd speed, but I/O and decompression chips then will this change development in what they target?

 

[prodyg]

"Developers will learn to address PS5s SSD advantage"

well yeah... and Water is wet.

what is the point of this thread? its not new news or anything that isnt already painfully obvious.

 

[thomasmahler]

I guess my question to you is, then why did EPIC RE-CODE their engine to take advantage of high SSD speeds after meeting with Sony a while back? I think engines if we see anything this summer from big publishers or even lets say next GDC all showing updated engines utilizing not just the ssd speed, but I/O and decompression chips then will this change development in what they target?

Click to shrink...

Cause a company like Epic needs to fully support the PS5? That Epic announcement reg. them re-coding stuff was a bit of a non-announcement, really. There might be plenty of Sony First Party studios that will want to use UE5 and completely make use of PS5s hardware architecture. That doesn't at all mean that bigger third publishers will give a hoot about it all.

 

[Kyoufu]

The wondrous thing here is that we've seen this exact same thing in the past, but people are still building castle in the sky ideas about what'll happen this time around. The PS3 on paper was quite a bit more powerful than the X360 - IF you chose to fully indulge in their hardware choices, use all the SPUs, etc. But there was a lot of cost and development time involved with that. So what did Third Party's do? They completely ignored the extra potential power the PS3 might have had and instead opted for developing the same game across multiple platforms: PC, X360, PS3 at the time.

Now, don't get me wrong, I'd love for the SSD speeds the PS5 will apparently have to be the standard for all devices, but that just won't be the case. So my guess is that we'll see the PS5 winning in terms of loading times and the X1SX usually featuring higher resolutions and / or better framerates. And then it's up to gamers to decide what's more important to them. But will third party devs significantly alter their games to fully make use of one particular hardware config? No, of course not. It's hard enough to design great levels as it is, the last thing you want as a developer is to now having to change content just because potentially on some hardware you could stream things in instead of showing a loading screen. The more realistic thing to have happen here is that most third party devs will still opt to show the loading screen, but it'll take 5 seconds for X1SX to load the next batch of content, whereas the PS5 only needs 3 seconds. That's it.

Click to shrink...

Comparing extremely easy to use I/O to the infamous CELL processor is strange to me.

 

[KillaKap]

I can't wait till the games come out. This insecurity about ps5's weaker specs, and Xbox slower SsD is getting out of control.

 

[Papacheeks]

Cause a company like Epic needs to fully support the PS5? That Epic announcement reg. them re-coding stuff was a bit of a non-announcement, really. There might be plenty of Sony First Party studios that will want to use UE5 and completely make use of PS5s hardware architecture. That doesn't at all mean that bigger third publishers will give a hoot about it all.

Click to shrink...

i think my point was EPIC a huge third praty publisher/company who makes one of the biggest widely used AAA engines, thinks obviously this is worth making code changes. And they have games on every platform from mobile/pc/console to switch. Even changes in SD memory is coming down the line wher eyou can get SD cards that are around 4gb/s. So if we get phones/tablets and maybe just ARM chips utilizing these for storage I think thats going to change mobile.

The big thing is to me if we see DICE show off Frostbyte engine with Battlefield this summer which I hear is next gen only. I think if we see a demo from them that they do a deep dive on, I can see a case for other third party's.

Guess we'll see on Thursday.

 

[thomasmahler]

Comparing extremely easy to use I/O to the infamous CELL processor is strange to me.

Click to shrink...

I mean, sure, it might be a bit of a stretch to compare the two, since the super fast IO will be used by everyone automatically and will be a super nice bonus to have (50%+ faster load times would be HUGE!), but will games be specifically adjusted to make use of the IO to a degree where other platforms would have to suffer? I'd argue no, there's 0 chance that'll happen.

 

[jroc74]

Comparing extremely easy to use I/O to the infamous CELL processor is strange to me.

Click to shrink...

Really strange. It sounds like the exact opposite. Both Sony and MS said they will make it easy for devs to utilize the SSDs. Velocity Architecture and Sony's version.

I guess my question to you is, then why did EPIC RE-CODE their engine to take advantage of high SSD speeds after meeting with Sony a while back? I think engines if we see anything this summer from big publishers or even lets say next GDC all showing updated engines utilizing not just the ssd speed, but I/O and decompression chips then will this change development in what they target?

Click to shrink...

What's funny is this gets overlooked. What happens when more devs use UE5, then what?

Like you say, more engines get updated like UE5, then what?

I said in that thread about this, Epic had 2 choices recode it or not. Even then, they could have done it to the Series X baseline, or even SATA SSDs.

Sweeney even said others will benefit. That to me includes MS.

 

[thomasmahler]

i think my point was EPIC a huge third praty publisher/company who makes one of the biggest widely used AAA engines, thinks obviously this is worth making code changes. And they have games on every platform from mobile/pc/console to switch. Even changes in SD memory is coming down the line wher eyou can get SD cards that are around 4gb/s. So if we get phones/tablets and maybe just ARM chips utilizing these for storage I think thats going to change mobile.

The big thing is to me if we see DICE show off Frostbyte engine with Battlefield this summer which I hear is next gen only. I think if we see a demo from them that they do a deep dive on, I can see a case for other third party's.

Guess we'll see on Thursday.

Click to shrink...

This was Epic, the Unreal-Engine Creators making that statement, not Epic the gamedev studio. They'll obviously need to make sure that the UE5 supports the PS5 to the fullest, that's what this was all about.

 

[pretzel]

Well, let me guess how Ubisoft is gonna use these super high speed SSDs...Ten times bigger open worlds with a million more fetch quests than current gen.
So excited!

 

[Kenzodielocke]

This was Epic, the Unreal-Engine Creators making that statement, not Epic the gamedev studio. They'll obviously need to make sure that the UE5 supports the PS5 to the fullest, that's what this was all about.

Click to shrink...

Will you be working with the PS5 to make that judgment call that third parties are mostly gonna differ in... loading times?

Because it feels like devs are saying they take advantage of the speed while also doing multiplatform games.

 

[Iron Eddie]

I agree but is very disappointing that this is the case. At least they can go crazy with first party I guess.

Click to shrink...

This was never an issue on PS4 where the PC was obviously able to do much more, so it's kind of odd how some act concerned heading into the next gen. Series X will also come with a SSD and I would imagine on the PC you could force gamers to play on an SSD too.

 

[chris 1515]

I would be shocked if most third party developers would not just develop their games for the lowest common denominator. I mean, there's literally 0 chance that levels will get changed just because the PS5 can load them faster, simply because it's way too expensive and work intensive to do that.

The super fast PS5 SSD is nice for first party, but it won't make any economical sense to heavily adjust your games to suit one particular platform. On PCs and the Xbox, you'll have to work with what's there. So it's 2 platforms against 1. The scenario pointed out in the OP is highly unlikely.

Click to shrink...

Ori Dev: PS5’s Super-Fast SSD is Nice For First Party Titles But Multiplats Will Be Developed for the Lowest Common Denominator

According to Ori developer Thomas Mahler, the super-fast SSD inside Sony's PS5 will likely only benefit first-party titles as third-party devs will developer for the lowest common denominator.

wccftech.com

They made an article but it make more common sense, the lowest common denominator will be the base. At least the first two years of cross gen game it will probably be Xbox One and PS4 HDD,

 

[Deleted member 46489]

This was Epic, the Unreal-Engine Creators making that statement, not Epic the gamedev studio. They'll obviously need to make sure that the UE5 supports the PS5 to the fullest, that's what this was all about.

Click to shrink...

Man, you're arguing against people who like a certain narrative. You won't convince them otherwise with logic or knowledge.

 

[Deleted member 23046]

If we add Lockhart into the equation, an eventual Switch successor, mobile gaming and the average gaming PC, maybe the multplatform publishing thT we knew since the 360 is coming to an end. Not in itself but in the form we've experienced it.

Revenues and costs aren't shared equally between each platform and it's not a guaranteed winning ticket for profits if the work provided for it isn't easily streamlined - and your product will be compared with all other software available on it.

 

[thomasmahler]

Will you be working with the PS5 to make that judgment call that third parties are mostly gonna differ in... loading times?

Because it feels like devs are saying they take advantage of the speed while also doing multiplatform games.

Click to shrink...

I think most people here don't quite understand what devs are saying. Of course everyone will 'take advantage of the speed'. That does NOT mean in any way that games will get specific adjustments to make optimal use of the PS5 architecture.

When has that ever happened? Right, never. You don't make 3 versions of your game that are specifically targeted to the specialties of each platform. I mean, maybe some crazy third party will for whatever reason, maybe Sony will throw some money around to make a statement, but apart from the obvious advantage of faster load times, you'd be a bit nuts to drastically alter your game to suit a particular hardware vendors specification.

 

[Iwao]

The PS3 on paper was quite a bit more powerful than the X360 - IF you chose to fully indulge in their hardware choices, use all the SPUs, etc. But there was a lot of cost and development time involved with that. So what did Third Party's do? They completely ignored the extra potential power the PS3 might have had and instead opted for developing the same game across multiple platforms: PC, X360, PS3 at the time.

Click to shrink...

I don't think there's that much of a similarity to be drawn between the exotic architecture of the PS3 and how to get the most out of it over time, and that of the PS5 where "time to triangle" using its features is supposedly under a month. This console has been engineered to automate and make certain processes invisible that you may normally expect to have to do to get the most out of it, and I think that's why we're seeing such specific high praise from developers.

 

[Bennibop]

Your thinking exactly along the lines that made Linus apologize. It's not about faster loading screens, games are constantly loading during RUN TIME. With that in mind


Playstation 5 can potentially have:
Better draw distances
Better LOD
Higher quality assets across the board


As well as better load times.

Click to shrink...

This. Also people keep going on about will only be used for first party games, not sure how third parties cannot use something that is part of the hardware like this, they are not going to slow down the call to the ssd.

 

[Kenzodielocke]

I think most people here don't quite understand what devs are saying. Of course everyone will 'take advantage of the speed'. That does NOT mean in any way that games will get specific adjustments to make optimal use of the PS5 architecture.

When has that ever happened? Right, never. You don't make 3 versions of your game that are specifically targeted to the specialties of each platform. I mean, maybe some crazy third party will for whatever reason, maybe Sony will throw some money around to make a statement, but apart from the obvious advantage of faster load times, you'd be a bit nuts to drastically alter your game to suit a particular hardware vendors specification.

Click to shrink...

Well, in AC Origins and Odyssey, when you use your bird, you can get a loading screen on base consoles and Pro, not on PC and One X.

In Star Wars: Jedi Fallen Order, the game on base consoles literally freezes for a few seconds to load the game.

Not saying this will happen, but I think there is more to the I/O than just fast loading times.

 

[thomasmahler]

I don't think there's that much of a similarity to be drawn between the exotic architecture of the PS3 and how to get the most out of it over time, and that of the PS5 where "time to triangle" using its features is supposedly under a month. This console has been engineered to automate and make certain processes invisible that you may normally expect to have to do to get the most out of it, and I think that's why we're seeing such specific high praise from developers.

Click to shrink...

Sure, you'll get faster load times and that's awesome. Again, does not mean that this'll mean that level designers will specifically adjust levels so that everything makes perfect use of PS5's architecture. I mean, that's madness.

First Party games that are specifically made for that hardware, sure, they can go wild. Third Parties? No way in hell.

 

[Morgan J]

I can't wait till the games come out. This insecurity about ps5's weaker specs, and Xbox slower SsD is getting out of control.

Click to shrink...

I was thinking the same as you. Cant wait for the games to get released so Era can chill.

 

[thomasmahler]

Well, in AC Origins and Odyssey, when you use your bird, you can get a loading screen on base consoles and Pro, not on PC and One X.

In Star Wars: Jedi Fallen Order, the game on base consoles literally freezes for a few seconds to load the game.

Not saying this will happen, but I think there is more to the I/O than just fast loading times.

Click to shrink...

What you just said is basically just fast loading times :D