Hogwarts Legacy finally came to last-gen consoles on Friday following an almost-three-month wait since the game's Xbox Series X|S launch. The delay seems to have been worth it though, not only for the state of the game on Xbox One, but also for Warner Bros. to gain a second sales wind.
This week's UK sales data is in, and Hogwarts Legacy has shot right back to number one on the charts in the region. It knocks the brand-new Star Wars Jedi: Survivor off top spot from last week's list, with Respawn's Star Wars adventure now sitting at number two.
This perhaps isn't surprising given how many Xbox One and PS4 consoles are out there, but to jump back to top spot for what is effectively a second launch of the game with a much smaller marketing push is no small feat.
Thankfully for fans who are picking the last-gen version up this week - it seems to hold up pretty well. Early footage of the Xbox One version of Hogwarts Legacy shows surprisingly good results for a console that's into its 10th year on the market!
Are you at all surprised that Hogwarts Legacy is still doing this well? Let us know what you make of the charts down below.
Comments 11
Last gen is definitively not dead. Any dev that decides to go next Gen only is leaving a lot of money on the table.
Hogwarts Legacy is genuinely one of the best RPGs I've played in recent memory, really hope they bring out some DLCs eventually.
Happy too see JK Rowling's world doing so well again, hopefully the planned show is as good as the game.
@Tharsman its now up to 1st party studios to make things move to next gen! once game will look so good and make big dedifference in graphics and make players want more then developers will be afraid to stay behind
@BrilliantBill A lot of those games were built with Last gen firmly in their sights to release on. There is no 'real' reason those games couldn't run on Last gen with more work and optimisation.
The issue isn't 'just' GPU - the CPU is 'much' faster 3.8Ghz versus 1.825Ghz in Single Thread mode and responsible for calling in all the Objects, textures etc and telling the GPU what to draw and where, handle AI, Physics, Particle effects etc etc, Its the 'brains' of the operation where as the GPU tends to mostly handle the image.
What we are seeing - especially in the PC ports of those games, that maybe 1 'core' of the CPU is being 'stressed' whilst the rest are 'under-utilised' so games are 'CPU' limited, not GPU limited. That's why those games couldn't hit '60fps' (even with RTX4090 GPU's at 540p) because of one 'CPU' core causing a bottleneck - and that's with the fastest commercially available CPU too.
The point is that these games are NOT optimised, not utilising the hardware properly. You have a LOT of under-utilised potential if they optimise the game to spread the workload over more cores - and that's without considering Multi-threading (effectively 'doubling' the Cores) - none of those games are utilising Multi-threading (XSX has 16 threads @ 3.6Ghz or 8 cores @ 3.8Ghz).
Jedi Fallen Order runs on XB1, so does Gears 5 for example and Fallen Order has many of the SAME issues that had at launch, the 'same' type of stutters etc as Jedi Survivor, same 'poor' optimisation of CPU - but it was 'ok' for a Late last gen console with 'new' hardware coming soon.
None of these were built 'specifically' for 'next' gen systems. They were built primarily for last gen hardware but with things taking 'longer' than expected, there comes a point when the amount of time and work required to port, optimise and continually update/support that game for its 'life cycle' on last gen Hardware isn't going to be financially worth it. 3yrs in, there can't be 'many' gamers still on XB1 for example to sell enough to cover the costs required to port it and they 'need' to work on next gen ports too where people may 'upgrade' to new hardware to play sooner or later anyway. With every passing year, the 'last gen' user base is reducing and those 'left' are buying 'fewer' games new - opting to play games they have or can buy cheap in sales. Those with 'money' to spend on Gaming are much more likely to have 'new' hardware now - but those games still need to 'release' to recuperate their investment and development costs...
Also, 12 TF is a theoretical maximum a GPU could potentially reach if all the Cores are operating at 100% for a 'whole' second - which is basically impossible. That's why 4TF from 10yrs ago isn't as 'capable' as 4TF today because they have improved its 'efficiency' (meaning more cores are active more often) and reduced Lag (meaning Data gets where its needed 'faster' reducing idle/waiting times) so games perform 'better' despite having the same 'theoretical' 4TF GPU.
But games are not 'always' limited by GPU or some GPU issue and those games also struggled to hit 60fps on Much more capable hardware due to the CPU utilisation...
Great games deserve to sell well
@Chinesus
Avalanche (the developers of the game) have come out and announced they have moved into their next game already
@Total_Weirdo
You been completely skip Redfall, but I'm glad Zelda is around the corner for you
Great game, glad it’s doing well!
Installed on my X1X to see what the quality was like. Oh boy, I've got used to the XSX (non) load times! It seemed to take forever to load up on X1X I know. Real world problems and all that HAHA
Leave A Comment
Hold on there, you need to login to post a comment...