Many Studios Are Struggling With Xbox Series S Requirements, Claims Developer

There is a lot of Series S out there, that should provide motivation!!

I Am Fish is hardly a next-gen game and I don't hear complaints about the PC versions that are required to scale much lower than the S if they want a wide audience.

How on Earth are they "struggling" with a console that is way more powerful than the XONE and PS4 combined?!
I'm not a dev, and I won't make any claims about how game development works, but logic says that they're full of s**t.

The series S is a turd and as i said a two years ago it will hold develment back... dont be surpised if series S starts to just be xbox one games with small upgrades....been saying for a while the xbox one X was a more powerful system minus the SSD....

isn't PS4 the one who holding back? RE4, Street Fighter 6, One Piece Odyssey still supporting PS4

There's a lot of Series S owners out there. Maybe it should have been more powerful, but it is what it is.

They should drop the mandatory launch support. I said a long time ago the S could hold back this gen for Xbox. It’s a powerful little unit yes, but as we go forward and games are getting more demanding like the recent Plague Tale 2, which the top end consoles are starting to struggle with, the S is going to be left behind. If devs don’t want to develop for it as they feel it’s under powered and miss out on that install base of players then leave that to their discretion.

@UndyingInsurgent95 its not about its power its about its LACK of power compared to Series X and PS5 its significantly gimped in comparison and the One X is actually more powerful in a few ways over Series S... they essentially have to make the series X game then go into it and downgrade tweak and optimize ALOT to get it running well on series S it does have like less then half the graphical power of the series x and ps5..
series x has 52 CU cores running at 1.85ghz 12 tflops
Series S has 20 cores running at 1.56ghz 4tflops
One X had 40 cores running at 1.15ghz but had 6tflops

point is graphically its not much better the One X the cpu is better ssd is better but on the graphics side its seriously gimped.......thats why developers seem to hate it, its essentially making a game for a weak ass system...

I could see Series S going the cloud route, the Xbox streaming device even looks like a tiny Series S.

@Fenbops Lol that would be industry suicide for Xbox to do that. That is a terrible idea. Devs have to scale down all the time for PC. Most still say S isn't a problem. There are a select few that do. I think some just don't like that it is more work. But these devs need to realize that the lower price point of the S brings in more consumers of their games. Xbox isn't going to just screw over S owners and go with your idea. That would probably kill Xbox as a whole if they pulled that stunt.

@Grumblevolcano thats a likely course of action but that would totally hurt the xbox brand, more likely think they will just make the game for the xbox one, do a small tweak to get the game 60fps and call it a day, personally thats what i would do i wouldnt focus my money on the weaker system thats never gonna showcase my work, id make it playable enjoyable but i wouldnt be going crazy to try and squeeze the best out of it....

Games are still developed for the Xbox one and ps4 , until they stop developing for these consoles I don’t see why they are complaining about the series s, and almost every game are also developed for pc they just need to put a little effort and scale down the graphics, lighting ,texture etc to optimize the game for the less powerful machine, if they are too lazy to do that they just have to release the games like on pc with sliders that we can adjust ourselves to our liking.

It's a nice little gamepass machine and if anything if support is dropped that will be fine for me since I could just stream the game on the system instead.

But I do agree with others talking about games that are also released on PC.... Perhaps Xbox games should come with graphic options. Honestly it's just two different hardware compared to the many different configurations of PC. And I was under the assumption since the architecture was very similar between PC and consoles that doing something as simple as graphic settings for different hardware wouldn't be an issue.

Series S should be just a 1080p system with no raytracing. Lower shadow quality and effects. Maybe there is more to it but I don't understand the issue or what the requirements are.

It must be much more difficult to make new games for the base PS4 model. Because Series S has the same architecture as Series X, it should be easier than targeting different PC configurations. If they think it's still a pain, these developers can include settings with sliders like the PC games.

Zero probability of Microsoft not supporting Series S before the next generation.

@Blessed_Koz I know that the Series S has a relatively "weak" GPU compared to the X and the PS5, but that's NO EXCUSE to s**t on the system. DICE managed to optimize their Battlefront II to run on potato PCs and these devs are telling me it's hard to work with a far superior architecture?! I'm sick and tired of badmouthing the S, when clearly the problem is on their end.

MS could shut a lot of these people up if they'd start cranking out first party games that look and run incredible on Series S.

Horizon 5 looks amazing and runs fine.
Gears 5 looks amazing and runs fine.

I'd be willing to bet that Modern Warfare 2 will look incredible and run at 60 and it's not even first party (yet?).

@Kaloudz Exactly! Let's take a look at the PS4 for example. Naughty Dog's Last of Us Part II ran at a stable 30 fps on an ancient machine that is powered by those super slow, super old Jaguar cores. It's all about optimization and taking the time to scale down some things. If it means that we can't get ray tracing, but in return, we get 60 fps at 1080p, then I'm fine with that.

@Fenbops The Series S runs it very competently. I guess "many developers" need to git gud or gtfo.

@gpapito exactly.

Too many of you are believing these Dev employees who are Sony fanboys. Think about minimum PC specs on most games then compare to the Series S. It’s lazy Devs that are the problem. If it wasn’t the S they’d find something else to cry about. They simply hate Xbox.

Just look at the steam hardware survey. Many people still using weak gpus to play, even integrated ones, and devs have to scale games down for them. Not everyone is buying a brand new Geforce RTX. And more than 30% are using a 6-core cpu!

But what bothers me most is that all those upscaling techniques currently used for PC games could also be used on console games, but it's not happening. Not DLSS, obviously, bur FSR and Unreal 5 tools are already available. There's no need to waste cpu/gpu time to create a 4k image (or 1440p, for SS).

Deathloop already uses FSR for its PC version, meanwhile PS5 and Xbox series don't.

The proof is there that high demanding games are running perfectly fine on the Series S, Look at flight sim as an example and Forza Horizon 5, graphically theres not a problem.

Anyway the next playstation and xbox pro consoles are right around the corner so for those who want the highest of everything then they can get those, for those who just want to get into next gen but at a budget then there's the series S and you can't complain for what it does at that price. And any dev who says the series S is holding them back are just not talented enough.

Maybe it's not about development but about publicly saying that Sony is right? Because I can't take this seriously considering that they have developed games for Facebook, Windows, MacOS, Android and Switch (thank you, Wikipedia).

They optimize for lower hardware on PC, this is not hardware issue, is not wanting to optimize a game properly. Talking as a player and independent game dev whose creators collection game (that doesn't event have access to the whole hardware) runs at 1440p @ 120fps on Series S. I know the graphics of my game aren't great, its a simple space shooting game inspired by asteroids after all, but 120fps is something that was impossible for my game to achieve even on Xbox One X, despite being a super simple game. Xbox Series S CPU is way more powerful than Xbox One, and the GPU is great as well. Some people talk about 6tf vs 4tf but forget about architecture, Series S is a more modern and capable architecture.

@Blessed_Koz Whilst I will agree that the GPU is somewhat smaller than the One X, its also not been designed for targeting 'high' resolution visuals. The One X may well be able to deliver a higher resolution in some games as a result of a bit more Graphical Processing Power, but then it was designed ONLY to boost resolution.

The Series S has a much better CPU and of course a much faster SSD too as well as the ability to use DirectX 12 features like Mesh Shading, VRR etc which the XB1X can't. It will work with Nanite/Lumin with UE5 for example but the XB1X won't and certainly can't do any Hardware accelerated features either.

Instead of comparing it to a 'last' gen console that was designed to boost visuals up to 4k, Compare it to the Series X. You have a GPU that is essentially 1/3rd that of the Series X. 1440p is about 2.2x smaller than 4k so 1440p, keeping 'everything' the same, would likely be a bit too much. 1/3rd of 4k (in terms of Pixel count) would likely be around the 1200-1300p point - so if they are 'pushing' 1440p, they would likely need to reduce workload elsewhere.

It should be more than 'adequate' to deliver the game at 1080p - assuming the Series X is hitting 4k and offer much better performance than an XB1X. Not only that, it has all the modern features built in so UE5 games will 'run' on it and, if you have seen Gotham Knights analysis, is perhaps the 'best' performing Console version and 'playable' on a Series S which wouldn't be possible at all on an XB1X.

Even if they dropped support for XB1S and 'allowed' games to release on XB1X if they 'could' run, you wouldn't get many more games moving forward because they would be built to utilise modern console features - like high speed data transfer from SSD's, Variable Rate Shading, Mess Shaders, Ray Tracing, High Frame Rate modes etc that the XB1X cannot do...

Yes the Series S isn't going to compete with a Series X or PS5 on a '4k' TV comparison, but on a 1080p screen, you are often above 1080p getting a 'super-sampled' Higher res image which is 'pin sharp' when pixel mapping 1:1 with the display.

I can see 'traditional' rasterization being a bit more limited but its still more than twice that of the PS4, outperforms the PS4 Pro too - bare in mind that its often outputting 2 frames with 'higher' visual settings, even if its at a slightly worse resolution, for every 1 frame of Pro/X hardware - 60fps vs 30fps. The PS4 has a 1.84TF GPU and both PS4 and Pro have a lot less RAM available too. So if that is delivering 1080/30, the Series S delivering 1200/60 is more than 2x...

The vast majority of games still have XB1/PS4 versions so I call BS on this.

Series S was always a problem and its coming home to roost.
Armchair critics aside, if you actually make games, then having to design with that weaker GPU in mind is a definite issue and its amusing to see so many in here dispute that with people who actually make games for a living.
I think the series S is a fine little machine, but splitting your user base was never a good idea for ease of development, even if it brought in a lot of sales.

That developers will still extend their effort and produce good results on it is a given, its sold well and demands support now.
But it DOES affect how games are on Series X, no matter how many games players wish that was not the case.

That developing for previous gens can hold back development of current gens is pretty accepted by most these days, so its complete lols for those that wish to deny the weaker GPU of series S doesn't also have an affect, it quite clearly does.

Sorry again to not agree with the overall sentiment here, but reality is reality.

I got one with the promise of having every game that was gonna be available on X, so as long as that's done, I don't give a F about anything else.

Just what I wanted to read, as a proud Series S owner..
More seriously, I've expected and predicted this, but counted on MS pressuring teams and demanding quality through the lifecycle of the platform. Unfortunately, second part has not panned out.

@TheGrizMan How are they Sony fanboys?! I swear sometimes some of you just say crap to say it. Enough with the console warring.

I sure hope this is something that can be sorted out. The Series S is a bold move, but I can really see it paying off by getting in on a big market who want the latest games, but on a budget.

If the console is hard to make work (and will get worse in the future) then that'll turn developers off from Xbox entirely if it's a package deal

@BAMozzy Speaking of ram, that is one area the XSS is left behind by some older consoles.
Ps4 is 8gb 256 bit, 176 Gb/s.

ps4 pro is 8gb 256 bit 217.6 Gb/s

One X is 12gb 384 bit 326.4 GB/s

Series S is 8gb 128 bit 224 Gb/s and 2gb 32 bit 56 Gb/s

Remedy (developers of Control) 4A Games (developers of Metro Exodus) ID Software (Xbox studio and developers of Doom Eternal) have all make public statements about how the XSS is hard to get newer games working well on. Memory and gpu have been specified. Cyberpunk and Dying Light 2 also took a while to get 60fps modes indicating some possible difficulty. XSS falls under the pc minimum requirements for some games, so that may be why it is not as simple as moving settings around

Why don't they build for the XSeS and update it from there to run on the XSeX?
It'd be easier than making it for the XSeX and downgrading to the XSeS

@rhyno_888 install base on PS4 is massive so it makes financial sense to support it

@Widey85 Gotham Knights is a pretty bad example. If anything is suggests a lack of optimization for Series X. It looks worse in many ways than the Arkam games and has bad frame pacing. Could have been released 6 years and would have fit right in with games of that time

@Moto5 Of that 10GB, 8GB at 224Gb/s is available for Devs to use - on PS4 Pro, you get just 5.5Gb/s that is slightly lower speed, but also was supposedly targeting 4k. The PS4 gives Devs about 5Gb/s - so 8gb is more than 50% more and faster than the PS4 which was more than adequate for 1080p assets

On top of that of course, the Series S has a High Speed SSD too and dedicated 'decompression' built in to the Chip instead of that being done by CPU. Of course it still requires 'devs' to build their games around these features from the ground up. If you have to 'preload' assets into RAM for the area (as they do for last gen) then they don't rewrite the way the game runs on 'next' gen, its ported over and any 'performance' gains are purely down to increased hardware speeds alone, not any 'modern' features that would be much more efficient/effective....

It's not a simple case of matching settings and the 'only' thing a dev has to do is lower the output resolution to 1440p on Series S as everything will 'run' as smoothly - its a third of the power, targeting higher than 1/3rd resolution and with less RAM so can't use ALL the same 4k, high res assets in the same way. But with DX12 Ultimate features being implemented from the start, it will punch well above what any last gen Hardware could offer - even if they do have 'bigger' GPU's and more RAM...

Yeah, sure man, the opinion of the maker of an indie game that runs like trash even on the Series X is so valuable /s

It's a bit ignorant saying optimizing for XSS is just being lazy. If you were to target top of the market you would have to use all the latest techniques to attract average user. So things like different versions of ray tracing.
With promised feature parity between Series consoles, that is a huge ask to optimize for, with implementation restrictions on the X. If you are doing cuts, you need to develop alternative shadow techiques.. not to mention XSS as a target is starting to be at or below minimal PC requirements (which last time I checked, games played on those machines with low settings looked like X360 generation products).

If it wasn't for the Series S then developers wouldn't be complaining about how their games don't sell well due to low install base on Xbox. TBH the Series S has been the saving grace for Xbox this generation besides game pass. The only people buying Series X are people with too much extra income and Xbox fans. Truth be told, if you got $400-500 to spend. You buy a PS5 or upgrade a PC.

I love my Series S and so do many others. If they can make a game scalable on the PC then could they not to some extent make a scale-downed version of their game? Most games come out on PC nowadays too.

The reality is not that the Series S is holding back developers, it's the issue that it causes extra work and optimization vs if they just had Series X and PS5 to work with.
Not a coincidence that we see 60FPS modes added to Series S versions well after launch...

I've said here many times and am constantly chastised for it from all the series S fanboys. But will say it again - - series S, is, was, and will continue to be a mistake.

More and more developers are supporting that view as well.

So chastise all you want. Know I'm not crazy.

The biggest mistake Microsoft ever did with Series S is give it lower specs than the Series X. They should of did what Sony did with PS5, give it same specs as Series X but no disc drive.

@SplooshDmg Elden Ring is weird. My GPU sits just under minimum requirements (have a 970, but it wants a 1060; I think the 1060 is just ever so slightly more capable), but I was able to run the game on high settings at 50+ fps without issue the majority of the time.

But then you hear horror stories about vastly more powerful cards struggling to run the game, lol.

@blinx01 @Titntin @Fenbops @Blessed_Koz I've been saying same thing you guys have even BEFORE series S even came out.

But the series S fanboys chastise and pile on me acting like series S is greatest thing ever made and holy grail of gaming. It is clearly a mistake. It is holding the series x back more every day.

I take it these developers are not making games for PC, or are also complaining their games must run in anything older than a GeForce RTX 30 Series GPU.

Seriously: if you cant make your game work on Series S, you cant make them work on a PC AND make any profit.

One thing we keep seeing time and time again, are devs insisting to do things like push 4k visuals on the XSS. Looking forward to Digital Foundry dissecting Gotham Knights tomorrow or soon after, once there is no embargo in the way.

I thought for a second I wish we could get rid of the series s....but then thought hold on they have to get the same games running on worse pcs don't they so what the problem

@BAMozzy so barely 50% more ram and well less than 50% faster ram than a machine that was released in 2013 and considered underspec back then. Ram is not just used for textures either. RT uses more ram among other game/rendering features. XSS is very strong with SSD and CPU, but that doesn't mean those factors will carry it through games that are RAM or GPU heavy. There have been many well regarded dev studios that have identified these short comings. Even ID Software, I believe they are the only Xbox studio that have implemented RT on console games. Why would one of the most talented developers in modern rendering (and is an Xbox studio) say stuff like that if it wasn't true?

Those that know me on here. I not jumping on the bandwagon. As from day one I always said the series s from a developer point of few whatever way you look at it is definitely not a good thing from a time or development point of few.

The less devices you have to develop for the better, especially if said device is lower power than the other two.

If you don’t have to even think for one second about the series s as a developer that is one second you have saved. You get my point.

I do sympathise with Xbox developers in house They have to consider so many devices and systems. I believe this to definitely one of the reason we got Halo Infinite as it was and zero AAA this year 2022.
This is why Sony and Nintendo get the big AAA games out. Less devices to think about overall.

@Tharsman That is a ridiculous thing to say. The lowest RTX 30 card is still well over 2x the power of a XSS. XSS is more comparable to 1650 super. What developers try to push 4k resolution on XSS? Sounds like you are just making stuff up now

And what about the steam deck? It runs Plague Tale Requiem

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2UZ3L4Lh2w4

And Gothan Knigths

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0rE75PCts58

Edit: it's a 4-core CPU, 512 CU GPU, 16 GB Ram, 1.6 Teraflops (or, a better PS4)

A game dev "struggle" with Series S because:

A) they are basically too lazy to do the extra work or lack the technical talent to use the game engine

B) The need a more flexible and optimised game engine

C) They have lack of funds for B and are over ambtious

@Moto5 I guess you dont understand hyperbole:

There are game devs like the dev behind Dying Light 2 that released with 1080p/60 on XSX and PS5 but decided to force XSS to run 1080p/30 on Series S. Way later post launch they decided to offer a XSS performance mode that runs at 60fps, at lower resolution, but thats the bleeping point, almost anything you can do on a XSX at resolution X can be done on the XSS at a lower resolution.

Also check steam stats, the most popular GPU is the 1060, and games might not run amazing on it, but most still accommodate scaling that far low because they like money.

This isn't a good situation. The Series S like others have said is actually less powerful than the One X in quite a few areas. Many older backwards compatible games actually run better on the One X...
The Series S really needed to be a bit more powerful, it may have sold well but it's holding back this generation unfortunately.

@Darylb88 A trend I have noticed is the most noisy devs tend to be artists, and its nothing new that many artists are constantly fighting because they want to inefficiently throw polygons at the screen, performance be damned. Let someone else deal with optimizing stuff, and make sure to yell if anyone lower their poly count.

@Tharsman And Steam Deck is even weaker compared to the Series S, and runs games really well when developers do a good work.

@BANJO
I have to agree and like I said if a developer has to think for one minute about the series s it’s one minute they could have been doing something else on the Xbox series x.
I think the main thing is really Microsoft are creating an ecosystem so their in house developers for sure have to cater for so many different devices. Probably why we have had no AAA games this year 2022 and will probably never see the series x used to its full potential because it is basically not what Microsoft are about, if we like it or not. They want their games in as many devices as possible.
The only consoles that will get used to their fully potential is the Switch and PS5.

Would be fun to compare number of people calling for further graphic scaledown on XSS, with number of people calling Switch trash because it is too weak and limiting to developers.

@Sveakungen For real! These developers have a choice, they could put in the time and effort to develop for Series S or they can cut out the majority of the next gen Xbox ownership base and forget about being on Game Pass. Considering the variety of specs that a multiplatform developer has to consider just for PC, this whining about Series S seems like an excuse from mediocre developers that just aren't very good at their jobs.

@Cikajovazmaj
I have Series x and Switch. The Switch to me is just the Switch and for Nintendo exclusives and uses the power it has.
The thing for me is my Series X if a game was developed from the ground up just for series x would be better than a developer having to consider the Series s and also the extra time required.

@Jimez There are more of us Series S owners out there because it is cheaper which I assume was why it is less powerful. But if streaming is supposed to be the future of gaming anyway, why does the power of the Series S matter to begin with?

@Tharsman you assume they just sat on the 60fps mode for months? You don't think maybe they were working hard to get it out? When you say baseless junk like that why wouldn't I assume you where serious about the 30 series comment?

As for your comment about it being the artists complaining...

“The much lower amount of memory and the split memory banks with drastically slower speeds will be a major issue. Aggressively lowering the render resolutions will marginally help but will not completely counteract the deficiencies.”

That was the Lead Engine Programmer at ID Software. Xbox owned studio and one of the most highly regarded studios for optimized performance and advance rendering

@Moto5 ok bye bye, can obviously see all you want is to troll and argue. Enjoy yourself.

@raftos yeap.

This feels more like an optimisation thing. I mean PC developers have to account for weaker versions so why can’t these guys?

Here is a comment from Remedy for everyone saying just drop the resolution for Series S. Seems in line with what lead engine programmer at ID said. Guess people in the comments here know more about cutting edge game development that these guys.

"Xbox Series S, well, it's no different from the previous generations where the system with the lowest specs does end up dictating a few of the things that you're gonna do, because you're gonna have to run on that system, right? It's very easy to say that you just lower your resolution and texture quality and off you go, it's just nowhere near that simple.

It sounds good when you say it, but every engine is built in a different way. It's another thing when gamers might be like 'This game engine does all of these things!', well, it depends. Are you making an engine that's much more GPU bound or CPU bound? Which are you taxing a whole lot more? Well, we kind of tax both in Control because we have a lot of physics but then we have a lot of the ray tracing effects. That makes a huge, huge difference, especially on Xbox Series S"

@Moto5 but again that seems like it comes down to optimisation. I’ve seen pc ports that ran terribly despite working perfectly well on consoles, and PC is still significantly more powerful than consoles.

May as well just keep going, I'm sure a few people here actually care about what the people that make these games say. This is from 4A, developers of Metro Exodus. Pretty sure it is the only game on XSS that has ray traced GI. Another highly regarded developer for high end rendering.

"The RAM is not an issue for us (currently), but GPU performance presents challenges for future titles. Our current renderer is designed for high spatial and temporal resolution," said Shyshkovtsov.

"It is stochastic by nature. Dropping any of those would require us to do more expensive calculations dropping performance even further. We have a compromise solution right now, but I am not satisfied with it yet."

Xbox has peaked anyway. Do whatever.

@Moto5 but again they have to keep this in mind for PC development, especially with the Steam Deck now being released. This isn’t a new thing either, game developers have had to struggle with different system requirements for years now. Why is it only an issue now.

@Jireland92 of course it comes down to optimization. But that takes time and $$$ and can effect art direction and world building in these games. Not every developer is going to be able to rebuild their engine because it is GPU or RAM heavy. For example, maybe a developer have ray traced reflections and GI working on XSX but can not on XSS even when dropping down to 480p. Now they have to go and hand place light probes, rethink textures, consider the limits of cube mapped or SS reflections and change how the world looks because of all that. Games that have been developed around PC engines could be severely crippled in the future because of this. Will also limit creativity in design and cost more $$$ to develop

@Dezzy70 Yes, that's certainly the worry, having to cater to the Series S seems to be restricting the Series X. Problem is, it will only get worse. If it's such an issue now, 2+ years down the line it will only be a bigger problem..
Bizarre position for Microsoft to be in, the Series S sales wise has done them proud, but going forwards it will likely hamper game development for Series X.

Steam hardware survey has the top card being a GTX 1060, a card that came out in summer 2016. But yeah, totally the fault of the Series S for existing.

@Moto5 see that’s where I disagree. I’m of the belief that limitations can breed creativity since you have to think of ways around those limitations. A lot of technical achievements were accomplished because of this.

@SplooshDmg yes, just because it works on a PC doesn't mean it works well. Same with Steam Deck. It is up to the consumer to make choices between performance and fidelity with PC, this is not expected as much with console games. I have settled on setting for a PC game, then have had to change them playing through the game to accommodate new loads presented. Console settings try and take this into account for the whole game in every situation. These people talking about min spec PC stuff seem to be looking at older games and not considering how bad the performance can be. The XSS is below min spec for some of these games, let alone for future games

@XxEvilAshxX So long as MS first party games start coming out and play well on the Series S I'll be happy, but yes I think that will shut up some of these developers too.

@bobbypaycheque go look at the top 20 games played on Steam. Rust, Terraria, Sims, PubG, Apex.... the hardest one to run is probably Destiny 2 and that's not hard and an older game. Your example is not relevant to next gen gaming on console. Really a 1060 is over kill for the most played games on Steam.

Have you not seen what the best devs have said about the Series S?

@BANJO
Microsoft won’t care as it is an ecosystem they are creating as many devices as possible for Xbox in house games etc.
That is what matters to them. They don’t care about series s to x and pc and mobile and cloud.
The more systems the better.

@Jireland92 have the Switch for that. Series S was advertised as "next gen at lower resolutions" Doesn't seem very next gen if developers have to spend more time, money and make huge compromises or completely discard some rendering features and make up new stuff because of one oddball console. May as well just go make xbox one and one x games

@SplooshDmg exactly. I put a few examples of the most played games on Steam. Most can be played with the integrated graphics unit on a 10 year old laptop. People making these comparisons are not really understanding or looking at what the situation is. Plus a 1060 probably comparable to or faster than a XSS anyway, so the comparisons are a failure in that regard as well

@Moto5 to be perfectly honest I don’t see this next generation to be a significant setup up in the first place. I mean compared to previous generations which were significant steps forward in graphical capabilities, this one seems more incremental. I mean what did we really get, fancier reflections and faster loading.

And at the end of the day the Series S was designed and marketed as a cheaper value model. If the original model Xbox One and PS4 models could exist alongside the One X and Pro models without compromising development for those I see no reason why the Series S can’t exist alongside the Series X.

@BANJO I agree with that 100%, the future is hard to imagine for XSS. I think Xbox may have thought cloud gaming would be more popular by now so the XSS low spec wouldn't be as much of an issue for the future. Would be nice if they let devs do a cloud version for it so things can move a head faster and be un hindered on the XSX

Bullcrap. The S isn't holding back anything. Every game can be scaled down, as proven by cross gen games, Switch ports, and - for decades now - PC games. These people just don't WANT to deal with that, probably because it costs them a bit more time/money.

@Dezzy70 True, as you say Microsoft won't care. The bigger picture for them is the ecosystem of systems.. Just a shame it hinders the Series X reaching it's full potential..

@Tharsman

@Moto5 has had some valid counter arguments and instead of addressing those, you basically called him a troll. Sorry, but moto5 has presented the more persuasive case from where I am sitting.

@BANJO
It is what it is I’m afraid.

Increase the price of Xbox ports if they have to do additional work because of the series S lol

@rhyno_888 they aren't required to develop for PS4 they chose to , they can't develop for series X & not series S so either they develop for both SKUs or stop developing for Xbox entirely which obviously wouldn't be good

@After10Ben He's not too bad. I got into a similar discussion on YouTube and was told to leave by the video creator after I mentioned ID Softwares comments on Series S

If that's the case, they should drop the requirements to launch on series s. But hang on a minute, how does it work on pc? I'm sure there's less powerful PC's out there, that can still play these games fine. Like they could just cap resolution to 1080p and fps to 30 on series s, can they not? And turn off other things. And go all out on series x n PS5. Or is that not how it works?

@Stnkygrngo so xbox one has too low that remake4 dropped it

so devs are saying they cant get their game to work at 1080p 30fps on a series s?

The dual launch requirements for the two modern Xbox consoles might make more work for developers, but it's still far better than the alternative scenario, where some modern Xbox games don't work on a modern Xbox console. What a mess that would be! And especially disastrous considering the Series S is probably largely responsible for Microsoft remaining competitive in the home console scene this generation.

good maybe they will re-learn how to correctly optimize games...

If you can't handle porting a game to the Series S, you couldn't handle releasing the game on PC.

Cyberpunk managed perfectly well 60 FPS openworld and looks stunning

@rhyno_888 PS4 is last gen, so no

What I'm getting from a lot of these comments is that some of you spent way too much on a Series X from scalpers and now want to justify that that by kicking the Series S. The Series S is similar to the Switch where third party developers struggle, and first party studios take the time to do it right.

@Lurkes It does seem like they have gotten lazy.

This is the consequence of having a console launch with a less expensive...and less powerful...option just to appeal to more consumers. Microsoft split their own market, and that's a cardinal sin in sales and marketing, let alone the issues it inevitably created for developers who now had to accommodate a second, less powerful console with every single release. It's the same thinking that had practically ZERO genuinely worthy first-party games available for the XBox Series X/S within a full year of its launch. And at least part of why Halo Infinite has been such a fiasco with so many basic features and modes (STILL no simple, offline local splitscreen multiplayer) missing.

This whole thing was rushed out the door.

You can only blame COVID for so much; there were a LOT of gross mistakes made. For one thing, Microsoft should have waited at least another year to launch the Series X...and ONLY the Series X. As for Halo Infinite, focusing on making it a F2P title with so much effort put into skins is pretty much singlehandedly responsible for the mess it has been, but let's not forget that, unlike the Series X/S, it actually HAD an extra year and they STILL screwed it up.

@Moto5 Who are the "best devs" and where does one see what they have to say? LOL It is relevant because the Steam hardware survey proves that people live in a bubble thinking most people use top of the line hardware when that simply isn't true. For a significant number of people the Series S and Gamepass is the only way they can afford to get into gaming. So enough with the elitist gate keeping BS and brown nosing for devs who can't be bothered to optimize a few settings. If you want to get really technical about it the Xbox Series X and the PS5 are no longer impressive hardware either in the PC world. They are two years out of date and a generation of GPU's and CPU's for PC have come out since.

@Titntin I disagree respectfully. Why is it anything other than what it is now? Essentially a drop in resolution and a few other settings. Halo, Forza Horizon 5, Flight Sim etc. all optimized fine for the Series S. I also take issue with the title of this article. "Many" devs it seems is a VFX artist from the team that made I Am Fish and another artist from Rocksteady.... As a dev myself although not a game dev I take issue calling an artist a dev. They are not. And this article is a nothing burger for clicks.

@bobbypaycheque
Well at least its respectfully!
There is no question that if you put the effort in you can make almost anything run on anything, the issue is cost.
Your attempt to paint a series S version as simply turning down a few knobs, shows clearly how little knowledge of game development you have, it is genuinely not that simple and to allow for series S you have to make compromises on your design. That's an absolute fact backed up by the people who make games, in the same way that many of the people trying to deny it here on this thread, have pointed out keeping developing for the older platforms restricts design. Both are true.
If it were just CPU the job might be easier, but series S has slow ram, slower than some of the last gen consoles and that creates issues beyond what can be described in a comments post!
Some of the amazing switch ports have shown just how inventive devs can be - they've squeesed some impossible games onto that little unit. So given that the Series S is not as compromised as a switch, I'm sure you can get almost anything to run on it if you put in the effort. But designing that into the game design restricts how far you reach with your top line version. Everyone points to PC's here, but that's a prime example of high end being held back by having to cater to old platforms. I've had a 3090 since release and hardly anythign is designed to really push it cause its got to run on all the low stuff. That's why series X has no real tech show cases and remains disappointing at pushing tech despite having powerful hardware - I even had to run FH5@ 30hz cause the pop in was so bad otherwise, and the loading times make you wander if your ssd is working.....

I remain amused that bunch of gamers on a thread would think they know how to develop a game, when its clear most don't even understand basic principles.

Developing for last gen restricts development for current gen.
Developing for Series S restricts development for Series X.

Neither of these things means we cant see excellent games on series S and some have already been delivered. But they come at a cost in time and design that devs would rather not pay. To deny that is to be living in a fantasy land, but hey, this is PureXbox so knock yourself out

Series S is a great machine. I live mine with the XScreen. I’m rarely without it.

These complaints are about lazy developers who just cannot be arsed! Sorry but I hear people saying that we should not refer devs as lazy but this is a prime of example of why some are. The extra effort to get games dunking smooth on Series S is minimal. They can get them running on Xbox One and PS4 fine so this is just devs who are moaning and simply cannot be arsed to do their jobs.

The Series S is perfectly fine, plenty powerful and will be around for a long time. Some devs just need to get a grip and get on with doing their jobs!

@bobbypaycheque the best at advanced rendering. Nice try on distorting what I said though. Here are links to the comments I quoted. Not that you probably care to read, it seems you already believe you know more than people that make games

https://wccftech.com/id-software-devs-concerns-xbox-series-s-specs/

https://www.vgchartz.com/article/447996/remedy-xbox-series-s-optimization-isnt-as-simple-as-lowering-resolution-and-texture-quality/

https://wccftech.com/xbox-series-s-ram-not-an-issue-but-gpu-performance-presents-challenges-for-future-titles-4a-games/

@Titntin "shows clearly how little knowledge of game development you have" I am a software developer, while that isn't games I do know what we do here is a LOT more complicated on the compatibility side than getting a game to run. But the basic principle remains the same, of course I simplified it because do you really want me to break down a full requirements discovery report in a forum??? I'll bite, what do you do for a living that makes you know SO much about game development? You probably don't, just like the two squeaky wheel artists who were quoted as "devs" in every one of these articles doesn't know much about it either. So since you're such a stickler for the details, break down your professional experience in game development so we can all bow to your incredible knowledge of game development and throw in a quick PSWBS and maybe a brief ACWP so we know all the details. Seriously, if a developer can't make a game run decently, 1080p 30fps, on what is essentially a Ryzen 3700 and an RX5600 with FSR 2.0 support....that's on them. Because it would be rightfully seen as absurd if a dev complained about not being able to optimize a PC game for those specs.

EDIT FYI "I even had to run FH5@ 30hz cause the pop in was so bad otherwise, and the loading times make you wander if your ssd is working..... " This is definitely a you problem. But you should be able to sort it out no problem with your extensive knowledge of game optimization.

@Moto5 I did read those articles at the time, the ID Software devs seem to disagree, so there isn't even consensus within the team. Control ran poorly on mid to low PC hardware so again, that seems like optimization is something Remedy can work on. One of your little articles you googled up contradicts the other one. So which "real" game dev is right huh? The guy who says RAM is the issue or the guy who says RAM isn't the issue? I work is software development, not game development but we do need to optimize software for a much wider selection of hardware. What do you do for a living that makes you the expert? Three devs out of an entire industry doesn't make whatever bizarre point you're trying to make true.
AGAIN, if a developer can't make a game run decently, 1080p 30fps, on what is essentially a Ryzen 3700 and an RX5600 with FSR 2.0 support....that's on them.

@bobbypaycheque You seem seem to willfully misinterpret things. There is no contradiction. Some game are more RAM intensive and some GPU. That was even talked about by Remedy and 4A. Not all games make the same demand on hardware, but I guess you fail to understand that. ID Software said they couldn't implement RT in Doom Eternal on XSS because of ram limitations as well. Their engine is very efficient on GPU and runs very fast on PC, so maybe that could be why they didn't mention GPU as a limit for them. And as far as the quality of those developers go, games from all 3 consistently score well and all have been considered very good looking for many many years.

Also a rx5600 is around 60% or more capable than XSS. I wouldn't expect you to look at numbers or specs though. I'm sure you know better than AMD on this as well

@bobbypaycheque Sorry but I dont believe the anger or bile in your reply encourages resonable discourse, so I'll not engage futher. Im not so sure why you are getting so worked up... but have a good day.

@Moto5 RT is a visual setting - its like on PC where you have 'low, medium, high, ultra' but they are using RT as an Ultra setting on top of the underlying SSR to back it up.

That is NOT a fundamental issue with developing and getting games to RUN on Series S - especially NOT one that was originally built from the ground up to utilise the hardware to the fullest but look and run great on Last Gen hardware. RT is 'bolted 0n' and patched on top of the game to add RT reflections and Series S owners still get to play the game at better frame rates and overall improved version than you'll get on a One X or PS4 Pro - both have more GPU power but can't match the amount of frames the Series S can...

See what happens in a few years when devs are shifting much more data back and forth between RAM and SSD instead of cramming it for the entire level so you don't have reloading screens. A lot of that can be scaled down if you are not using the 'highest' 4k quality assets, When they take advantage of all the DirectX12 features inc only streaming in the part of the texture needed not the entire texture - saves RAM and scales down... as does VRAM too if its designed to be 1440p or less

@Titntin No anger or bile. Simply asking what puts you in a position to call me ignorant when I have been in software development for over 12 years. You had my respect until you were extremely rude and disrespectful in your reply. I merely asked what makes you more qualified than any Joe blow off the street to comment on this and your reply is bow out of the conversation on the grounds that I was somehow mean for calling you out on how credentialed you might be to comment on the issue. Weak response after a weak argument. Blocked and goodbye.

@BAMozzy Don't waste your time, @Moto5 thinks because he can read a number beside the word "teraflop" that he knows how performance is actually measured, or that three devs' hot takes from years ago represent an entire industry today. He doesn't have clue how software development actually works and is just here to be a negative troll. Your reasonable and logical arguments will go right over his head.

@BAMozzy I do agree that a game build ground up for the XSS can be, and is perfectly fine. In the case of Doom Eternal RT is a added feature that is not necessary, but that is not true for all games. 4A's Metro Exodus Enhanced is a good example, it uses RT for global illumination. It also looks good and and has amazingly lit scenes over the standard lit version because of it. Without RT in the enhanced version you wouldn't be able to see anything (or barely anything). The problem I have with the XSS is that developers have to release on it if they want the game on XSX. Is takes more time, more money and could limit the game in some ways. May be having less games coming to Xbox because of this too. It might be hard for some devs to rationalize doing that when Sony is offering $$$ to be exclusive and only has one next gen platform to target, saving time and money

@SplooshDmg I'm not trying to dunk on Xbox either. I think both X and S are great, and I also think the series S is awesome for the $$$ or if you have a 1080p display! I just wish the X wasn't as tethered to it. Some design choices also seem odd, like yhe fast CPU. It is cool and allows 120fps in lots of games, but how many people gaming budget focused have a 120hz display? Seems like more gpu or ram would make more sense.... it's like pairing a 3700x with a 1060. The 3700x will always be out running the 1060

@SplooshDmg your 3700x will probably be good for a long time, don't think there is much that will currently bottle neck on that at 60fps. Also seems like games are getting more gpu heavy if anything, will make your 3700x and 3080ti combo last quite a while.

I just want series S to play the games 1080p 30 fps without RT is fine with me surly it can do that with most games?

@trev666 I'm pretty sure it will be fine and supported for a long time. Even if Xbox allowed games to be XSX exclusive I bet most would still get a XSS version anyway. But I doubt Xbox will let games just be released on XSX, it would be too damaging to customer trust

None of the games you mentioned are using VRR, Mesh Shading, Sampler Feedback etc which will also make a massive difference and again 'scale' with resolution too. Mesh Shaders, like Nanite, will reduce the polygon count inline with resolution. At 4k for example, you could have 4x more Polygons than 1080p with 'each' being 1 pixel in size effectively.

What you are seeing is 'raw' performance. Games built in a very traditional way to work on 'legacy' hardware so the 'only' boosts you get are 'boosts' directly related to 'RAW' performance differences. We haven't yet seen how it 'performs' relative to Series X with 'true' next gen games utilising the latest features - Nanite is basically Mesh Shading, Lumin is Basically RT and like RT can be Hardware accelerated - things 6TF XB1X CANNOT do so even with more GPU/RAM cannot compete with 4TF Series S.

Games won't miss Series S or Xbox - not unless Sony pays to keep them off of course. Those games will scale down and don't forget, PC specs are often 'higher' because they are NOT optimised for Gaming - they are built from 'component' parts bolted together and designed for multi tasking so literally 'brute force' performance where as a Console is tuned, optimised and built with fixed spec that won't be affected by System software, an all in one Chip design making communication between CPU/GPU etc more efficient.

Time will tell of course, but right now, we haven't seen the limits of what the Series S can do with next gen games designed around the features of next gen hardware, Game Engines and API's. However, it 'should' scale well between Series S and X because the GPU/RAM scales with resolution too and the Series S isn't trying to compete with a 4k premium console, its a lower res, lower cost option that enables gamers to play the SAME games, experience the SAME stories, SAME worlds etc as the Series X. Its NO different from the PS4 vs PS4 Pro or XB1S vs XB1X - and sometimes you did get more options on the Premium model (like 60fps modes) because they could reduce resolution 'more' and still be at an 'acceptable' visual level but PS4/XB1 owners can still play the SAME games and still experience the SAME stories etc.

You'll never get to play next gen games on XB1X/Pro despite both having 'bigger' GPU's - Gotham Knights for example outperforms Series X with literally 'just' a resolution drop - maybe because it has relatively higher CPU resources and the game is very CPU intensive. But it won't play on a 6TF XB1X so you 'miss out' unless you buy a next gen console - Series S owners won't miss out...

@Moto5 Completely agree with you, series S will always be supported and devs will just have to work a little harder to ensure their game works properly on the system. It can clearly cope if it gets the right attention 😁
Thanks for your reasonable posting on this subject and not rising to the earlier bait. I enjoy civil discussions, but this subject appears to engender some kind of anger in many, who seem to repeatedly stamp their feet and shout 'respect my authoriton!' Its shame that gamers cant seem to accept any opposing viewpoint without immediately seeing 'an enemy' - I had thought seeing world the in black and white instead of the infinate shades of grey it is, was a childish youth mindset, but sadly in these times thats no longer the case.

The people who clearly have never done any development for anything whatsoever, just like the artists quoted in this article, claiming developing scalability for PC is easier than doing so for a box that has the exact same specs across the board is possibly one of the most ignorant takes I have seen on a gaming website. And that's saying something. I guess a basic grasp of objective reality and actually having some background in a technical field before preaching about it is still too much to ask. And apparently asking someone what their technical background is that may give them some sort of validity is becoming angry? Who knew such opinionated people could be so sensitive.

@BAMozzy I do agree with what you are saying in many ways! If games where to use all these features (except VRS, that has been used and doesn't seem to make a meaningful difference) a game could look and run amazingly on the more limited XSS hardware. But that doesn't look to be the way things are going, UE5 seems to be more widely adopted than custom game engines that take advantage of these features. Also if even Xbox studios haven't used used these features yet it doesn't look good for less technically proficient AA and AAA to start using them anytime soon. Remember we are pretty much 2 years into this generation, it is about 30% done. The old One X and Pro are staying surprisingly relevant for a long time! A lot of what you are saying I see as theoretical and best case, but I guess we will see. I hope it turns out as you say, but it seems very optimistic to me.

I also agree with console APU and architecture pushing sometimes well beyond equivalent PC hardware. But that is mostly realized in 1st party games. Not every multiplatform game can be so custom tailored to specific hardware. It takes more work and time as evidenced by how long it takes for some 60fps patches to release on XSS.

Also using Gotham Knights as an example seems ridiculous. They couldn't even get the 30fps cap correct on any console and run awful on powerful PCs. And it doesn't look that good or do anything special. It is a worst case scenario. I could say Terraria runs well on Wii U and XSX. It is true, but doesn't mean XSX games should run on Wii U.

What I don't agree is comparing XSX and XSS to One and One X (and Playstation equivalents) Xbox One and Ps4 where the base lines and sold the most, settings and resolution where often improved for the X and Pro. XSS is not a base line, XSX and PS5 are. Xbox sells the least consoles and now have divided sales between two models. What multiplatform publisher/dev is going to look at possibly the lowest selling console as a baseline? Of course people that make games are going to resent it a bit, more work and time for the least profitable machine!

@SplooshDmg Yeah, comparing multiplatform games to stuff from Naughty Dog, The Coalition, Playground, Santa Monica, Insomniac is ridiculous. These studios probably get to work with the hardware developers, get to focus on less platforms, have HUGE budgets and pretty much guaranteed sales! It is comparing the most advantaged to the ones fighting for a spot!

Have had less interest in PC myself lately, shader stutter drives me insane!! Haha, but I still find things I want... Like a GPD Win max 2 with 6800u🤩

Woah, someone who blocked me because he wasnt angry? That makes sense.
Basic reasearch of course, but if you genuinely wanted a little info on someones background, looking at their profile is normally first port of call. Swapping cv details on a web chat site to try and gain credibility is really crass, its not important enough to engage in that here, people may think what they wish.

I continue to believe that the series s is a capable machine, but requires some thought and planning to get a good skew depending on the game and engine. Devs would prefer not to have to consider it, as I still contend its not always straight foward to scale back your game and make it fit, but the machine is too popular to be skipped, so devs just have to get on with it, struggling or not!

@Titntin It was pretty funny that he accused others of being angry. Also his claims of software development.... targeting screen sizes??? Maybe ATM machines or a Dreamcast VMU? Doesn't seem relevant to game rendering..... Anyway, the Series S will probably be fine and offers a lot for the $$$, specially when paired with game pass. I just can't help but feel it is why we are seeing delays and not much is really pushing the Series X. But that is just speculation on my part from what makes sense to me and what developers (credible ones) have said. I am excited to see what talented Xbox studio come up with in the next few years though!

@SplooshDmg Maybe also the games we play, but I do seem to notice it easily. Lots are stutter free on PC, I apparently just dont play them. I'm not about frame analysis either, just want things to run smooth an be hassle free. This new gen of consoles has been so good that is maybe also why I have cared less about PC. PC has almost become my classics platform, the last 2 games I played where Half Life(the OG, not Black Mesa) and Baldurs Gate 2. Definitely don't need much power for that. If some more really cool games come out on PC that are demanding I may just cave and get a 4090 build, but I don't see anything on the horizon honestly

I don't have a lot of time for gaming, so I get very frustrated when I turn it on and can't play right away. Windows updates, new drivers, controller setup, bluetooth pairing, VOIP ect. Steam was resetting my settings in Half Life 2 randomly when I played it, controls and video. I wanted to take hammer to the damn thing🤬 Games in recent memory that stood out for stutter are Stray, Elden Ring and Chernobylite. I ended playing all 3 on console because I felt my experience was being compromised with the stutter. Specially Chernobylite, I found it completely immersion breaking

@Jireland92 you are absolutely correct! I bought a Series S to compliment my PS5 & truth be told it's the best gaming purchase I've made in a LONG time. I've played games on both PS5 & Series S back to back & that performance gap isn't mind boggling. MWll for example, I could barely distinguish the difference between PS5 & XSS as both games run at a stable 60fps and the main difference is resolution (dynamic 4K vs dynamic 1440p).

A lot these devs now having issues is honestly ridiculous. The number one thing holding back development is PS4/Xbone. Gotham Knights is prime example of a game that spent most of it's development cycle trying to ensure it's playable on PS4/Xbone consoles & then 9 months before the game releases they decided to drop the PS4/Xbone consoles because they feared performance issues. I truly believe that if Gotham Knights spent it's entire development cycle building the game solely for current gen I think the game would absolutely be capable of hitting 60fps.

One thing that frustrates me is people (general public, kids arguing on websites) don't realize that the Series S has a lot more in common with the Series X than what meets the eye. Both consoles feature an AMD Zen 2 CPU (Series X clocked at 3.8GHz and Series S clocked at 3.6GHz) & a RDNA 2 GPU (Series X has 52 Compute units clocked at 1.8GHz & Series S has 20 CU clocked at 1.6GHz). Both consoles feature GDDR6 RAM (16GB on XSX & 10GB on XSS). Both consoles feature the same WD SN530 NVMe SSD with custom ASIC supporting PCIe 4.0

The reason I mentioned the technical jargon is to paint a picture as I've seen so many people suggest that the Series S is simply a slightly more powerful Xbox one S which is something that can't be further from the truth. The Series S is an entry level next gen console through & through. The console is NOT designed to push 4K graphics at 60fps+ and therefore doesn't need that extra graphical grunt that the Series X needs to push those visuals. The Series S is more than capable of running modern games at 1440p at 60fps+ just like what it's been designed to do.

Many developers have said that the Series S punches above for it's price & that optimization between the two consoles is similar to scaling games for a more powerful PC as well as making sure it runs on lower end hardware as well. Here's some links confirming that it's NOT all doom and gloom for the Series S.

https://gamingbolt.com/the-medium-developer-says-overall-experience-and-fun-of-game-same-on-xbox-series-s-as-series-x

https://gamingbolt.com/motogp-21-dev-surprised-by-the-smoothness-in-development-on-xbox-series-s

https://www.windowscentral.com/native-xbox-series-s-games-are-proving-consoles-power

In conclusion this post is LONG probably too long but but after seeing some comments trashing a console that is actually a badass little BEAST, I had to offer some counter arguments to the narrative that the Series S is holding back game development. This is simply not true, the number one thing holding back development is greed. Publishers forcing devs to make games compatible with aging consoles that are extremely underpowered compared to current gen but they insist because of the large install base of 150 million + (PS4 & Xbone combined). Once development is focused solely on current gen, I believe we will see that the Series S will still hold its own. In the last link we're already seeing this to be true. MWll is a great example of what the Series S is capable of. It runs extremely well, looks gorgeous & offers an experience that's almost indistinguishable from the PS5 version.

Sorry for the long post, to those that made it to the end have an awesome holiday season, happy gaming ✌️

@Spider-Kev cause people dont buy the high end equipment to have the lowest common denominator hold them back.... and thats what your advocating... you make the best you can then make the sacrifices to make it run on the ***** hardware... and in this gen out of the 4 systens the S is the ***** system sorry but its true....seems to me the only ones defending the S are the ones who bought it and dont want to admit it is a ***** system....its like buying a One S and then defending it against the One X... its a ***** system out of all 4 of the new systems its is the ***** system... personally MS screwed the pooch should have went the way of sony and made same system with smaller drive and no disc drive... then we wouldnt have this issue at all..

@Blessed_Koz
I'm not defending the S, I was just asking a question.

Also, I own Series X