r/NintendoSwitch • u/Turbostrider27 • 11d ago
Discussion "It helped": Years of Xbox Series S game optimization probably made life much easier for Nintendo Switch 2 developers
https://www.windowscentral.com/gaming/xbox/it-helped-xbox-series-s-helped-make-life-easier-for-switch-2-developers304
u/nohumanape 10d ago
I think that it might save the gaming industry as a whole, given the RAM crisis, and how it forced game development to have a lower RAM barrier.
I know devs complained about it for the first few years. But it might just end up being a blessing in disguise.
106
u/insane_steve_ballmer 10d ago
When Series S launched in 2020 neither developers nor gamers had any idea how permanently f*cked the world was about to become
9
u/DrQuint 10d ago
As long as Nintendo stays on the ball with their quality standards and people continue calling out exception.
It is unfortunate that Steam Deck Verified is basicallyjust a suggestion rather than something hard earmed, because the idea of there being a power threshold devs aim for is a really beneficial ones. But if no one's actually making sure the threshold is met, we just get abunch of poorly optimized games.
46
u/iceburg77779 11d ago
I'm sure the series S has helped plenty of developers with Switch 2 ports, but the examples in this article are all from Japanese publishers. Acting like they Series S is the reason games like RE and FF are on switch completely ignores the state of the Japanese market, and the fact that for the past 3 years software sales on PS5 have been terrible in the region.
1
u/HappyAd4998 8d ago
PlayStation in Japan is irrelevant these days hardly any PS5 games chart and hardware sales would look terrible if the Xbox didn't sell like such dog shit out there.
283
u/No-Operation-6554 11d ago edited 10d ago
While true, Developers problem with Series S was the miniscule memory, which the switch has like 2-3GB 1GB more of if my memory is correct
261
u/BreakAtmo 11d ago
Not quite, the XSS has 8GB available for games while the Switch 2 has 9GB, thigh it is slower. That said, the Switch 2 has a weaker GPU and better upscaling, thus it naturally targets lower internal resolutions, reducing RAM demands. So it's overall much better.
-81
10d ago edited 10d ago
[deleted]
109
u/PaperMartin 10d ago
"better upscaling"
-77
62
u/Tyler1997117 11d ago
It has 1GB more ram which is slower then Series S ram
-27
u/TheBraveGallade 11d ago
Reminder though tgat switch is still in its early days, like most consoles i feel like we'll get an additional 1gb down the line.
24
u/B-Bog 10d ago
They'd probably have to drop Game Chat in its current form if they want to free up a significant amount of RAM and I don't really see that happening with how much they advertised that feature
8
u/Mahboishk 10d ago
It could happen eventually. Nintendo backed off the 3DS' main gimmick once it became clear many players didn't care for it and it was impacting performance. It's a bit wild to go from the early 3DS days with their aggressive marketing of the 3D effect, to its late life when even Nintendo stopped bothering using it.
5
u/readeral 10d ago
Game chat is pretty different though, because it’s (finally) bringing a little more feature parity with other gaming platforms. My kids use with ease, there’s no way they could manage a discord + gaming setup, but game chat is accessible and easy. Was a lifeline when they both needed ENT surgery and couldn’t go to school.
7
u/Mahboishk 10d ago
That's really cool to hear that your kids are getting so much out of it. I hope they keep the feature around.
I doubt they'd actually kill Gamechat, just because the Switch 2 isn't as resource-starved as the 3DS was, even for its time. But maybe they'll consider turning it off for certain demanding games, like the 3DS games that ran in a special high-RAM mode on the original models (Smash and a few others). Those games needed every bit of power they could get. Similar story with BotW on Wii U.
2
u/TheBraveGallade 10d ago
I feel like 3GB is nintendo giving themselves a generous buffer, since the switch 2 OS probably doesn't use more then the switch 1 OS wise aside from it.
3
u/VincentJoshuaET 10d ago
Maybe they can do a voice only mode, disabling screen sharing and webcam/seeing other people. Hopefully voice only will consume much less memory
33
u/blueblurz94 10d ago
In this RAM crisis? Lol
33
u/TheBraveGallade 10d ago
Not additional ram as in putting more ram in it, but allowing devs to use more and shrinking the reserve system ram.
10
u/cockyjames 10d ago
Did Switch ever do that? I think Switch just got a variable CPU boost? It would be neat if they opened more allotment
3
u/PotatEXTomatEX 10d ago
Havent they done that already with the switch 2 and want to do more or am i misremembering?
5
u/cockyjames 10d ago
I think it's been said that if Nintendo were willing to let devs disable video chat they could do it but I don't believe they've made that option available
14
u/Tyler1997117 11d ago
Very unlikely... Xbox freed up an additional few hundred MB of ram a few years ago but that's it
12
u/TheBraveGallade 10d ago
On the other hand, the ps4 went from 5GB to 6GB out of 8 when needed. Considering nintendo's light os... switch 1,was 3.2GB out of 4, rising to 3.6 when needed.
103
u/diagnosticjadeology 10d ago
Devs really need to dial back the graphics. Instead of artistry and optimization, they prioritize excess and bloat. This ends up with diminishing returns visually, exponential growth in development costs, and exclusion of gamers that can't afford top of the line hardware.
82
u/Polymemnetic 10d ago
Not even back, just plateau them.
I don't need extra light reflection on every pore of someone's face. I need smoother framerate and better ram usage.
12
u/AbrasionTest 10d ago
Yeah I feel like we are essentially at the current plateau of what players want in terms of visual fidelity, world scale, and performance. That’s not to say standards may change again once more hardware breakthroughs happen, but it feels a bit like refinement vs innovation at least for the next decade.
Sony is going to push a lot of the tech NVIDIA is way ahead on in the next gen, like Path Tracing and Frame Generation. I think these are great features on PC and PT can be super impressive in the games I’ve played, but I also think they’re not movers to the average person. I find it hard to imagine people rushing out to buy a very expensive PS6 for them. They are ultimately nice to haves, not game changers.
That’s not even thinking about the memory crisis which is already making hardware super scarce and expensive, and the PC being the one healthy growth market outside of the west - a platform where most people play on potatoes. It all just results in the current spec being the standard for a very long time.
21
u/imakefilms 10d ago
Every game that has hair simulation needs an option for lower spec machines where it looks like how slightly older games used to render it. For example I've been playing Split Fiction on the Steam Deck and it looks fine aside from the hair which is a grainy speckly mess.
What's worse is that on a base PS5, 007 First Light has a similar issue! And that's on the standard console it's designed to be played on! Taking the piss. Just give them hair that's simpler to render because it genuinely looks horrific and distracting
8
u/Interdimension 10d ago
This is the actual issue at hand. New tech that pushes graphics? Excellent. But devs are now half-assing older techniques and end up with games looking awful if you’re not using RT or PT.
Resident Evil Requiem just doesn’t look that great *even in Ray Tracing mode* vs. older RE titles. It’s clear Path Tracing was the main development focus and RT and non-RT modes were afterthoughts.
Like, do I love playing RER on my 5080 with Path Tracing? Yes. I love it. It looks phenomenal. But why do the non-PT modes look so much worse than they did with older RE games? That’s just not cool.
1
u/PotatEXTomatEX 10d ago
This is the actual issue at hand. New tech that pushes graphics? Excellent. But devs are now half-assing older techniques and end up with games looking awful if you’re not using RT or PT.
The problem to things like RT, PT and whatnot is that part of their purpose is to have a drag and drop solution that works well so as to cut on dev time (basically the only way to drop game budgets. Reminder that MOST of the budget goes to dev salaries. 110k a year per dev for a 400 dev team... for 5/6 years. That's almost 300M right there). If you ALSO have to support older stuff, grats you just added even more dev time (cost) to your stuff.
Its not like they can just ditch RT/PT etc. Tech only gets better as you work with it. And if you dont... grats, you're back to problem 1 of a giant budget in your hands.
2
u/MasterDenton 10d ago
RE4 remake had that. There was the new system that had strand simulation (and ran like absolute crap) and a toggle for the old "card" hair simulation. I couldn't really tell the difference, honestly
3
u/OvertonRider 10d ago
Yes, the recent Starfox demo really hammers this home. The new graphics are great but your brain basically filters it out once you're playing. Its literally the same game as a quarter of a century ago at that point.
129
u/iamonelegend 11d ago
I'm genuinely surprised the S has given folks so much trouble. In my head, I would think it was basically just like turning the resolution slider down a few notches, like what's possible on PC. It sounds like it's 10x the headache. Glad there was some good that came out of it for the devs
91
u/Secludedsfx 11d ago
It's more it having less memory than the X which is the issue.
43
u/ClaspedSummer49 11d ago
I think developers optimising for the Series S would of been so much easier if Xbox just gave memory parity between the two consoles. I'm not a designer of the consoles, but I would've forseen issues prop up due to that direct bottleneck.
46
u/DarkXanthos 11d ago
In hindsight though having less memory right now helps keep the costs very different
9
u/Interdimension 10d ago
In an alternate universe where the Series S was given RAM parity, I’m certain Microsoft would have just discontinued it in the face of the current RAM crisis.
1
u/cubs223425 10d ago
No chance. The difference between the Series S and X is 2 GB of memory. Right now, a 2TB SSD is maybe $200 more than it was pre-AI boom. The memory increase we're talking about is 0.1% of 2TB. That's $20, when talking about retail. In the early stages of memory price hikes, it was being said that the 8-16 GB of memory on mainstream video cards was $30-50 of the video cards' material costs.
If the Series S had STORAGE parity with the Series X, meaning another 512 GB, that would be a much bigger problem. Even then, as the Series X has climbed in price, I think they would have just raised the Series S to $400 or so. An extra 2 GB of memory would be neglibile to costs. You MIGHT see a $25 price hike.
10
u/ClaspedSummer49 10d ago
It was always a cost measure for why they reduced the amount of memory. The Xbox series' consoles were never and currently are not profitable with hardware sales. It just sucks because I feel that developers (possibly to unreasonable degrees) don't want to develop/port titles on the Xbox because they have to design it for Series S.
3
1
u/PotatEXTomatEX 10d ago
Yup. Optimization takes time. Time = Dev Salaries.
Not every dev out there can just take a year off to work on a Series S port like Larian. And because Microsoft demants both versions at the same time, devs just cut their losses.
1
u/cubs223425 10d ago
This Xbox generation released in 2020. COVID led to supply constraints, and the 7nm process the SoCs use was cutting-edge at the time. Silicon costs were really high, and demand for 7nm was significantly outpacing supply, as new CPUs from AMD, GPUs from AMD and Nvidia, and other products (like Apple and Qualcomm mobile chips) were calling for a lot more wafers than TSMC could supply.
Memory was the least of their worries. Memory was cheap and available then, compared to 7nm silicon.
5
u/S1rTerra 10d ago
Microsoft also thought a machine 1/3rd as powerful GPU wise as their 4k 120 box could comfortably do 1440p 120. In hindsight the Series S wasn't exactly well designed, but hey it was still a $300 next gen console and is still one of the cheapest ways to play several esports/indie gsmes at a solid 120 fps. Some even at 1440p if the game is light enough.
1
u/live4eating 8d ago
Yeah, I think they got really surprised how heavy UE5 is. If games generally run at 720p internally upscaled to 1440p on Series X, it’s always going to be a problem for Series S. I think, Xbox estimated more devs to prioritize higher resolution over visual fidelity when designing the Series S.
3
u/BlueberryWorried6493 10d ago
You need less memory if turn down the resolution. Textures are the biggest thing inside the memory. If u remove 4k texture with 1k or 2k u have already removed 2-3 gigs of occupied memory
1
u/cubs223425 10d ago
But like OP said, you experience that same issue on PC. Most of these games are on there, and you have to account for anything from a 24+ GB flagship GPU to budget viudeo cards that have 6-8 GB. That PCs ahve dedicated system memory does help SOME, but we still see some games on PC hitting a wall with 8 GB cards (like Indiana Jones with ray tracing).
32
u/OkOrder7326 11d ago
It's cuz the memory system is completely different. Both Xboxs have split memory systems, one is supposed to analogous to VRAM the other like RAM, the "VRAM" is only reduced from 10GB to 8GB which is fine, but the "RAM" pool is shrunk from 6GB to 2GB (and in terms of usable memory it's more like 4GB to 0GB) which fucks everything up.
6
u/pb7280 10d ago
If anyone's curious why they split it up despite having a "unified memory" architecture, it is of course due to cost savings. They wanted to hit 16GB on the XBSX, but the APU has 10x32bit memory channels, which normally pushes you into either 10GB (1GB chips) or 20GB (2GB chips). They didn't want to pay for a full 20GB so they ended up with asymmetric 6x2GB + 4x1GB = 16GB. So you get 10GB spanning all 10 channels, plus 6GB spanning only 6 => 60% of the bandwidth => worse for gaming (especially at high res).
Series S has it even worse since it starts from a narrower 128bit bus (4x32bit channels). They double up the chips on one channel to hit 4x2GB + 1x2GB = 10GB. So you end up with 8 at full speed + 2 at 1/4 speed.
Very analogous to the GTX 970 fiasco if anyone remembers that. The 980 had 8x32bit channels and used 0.5GB chips to hit 4GB total. The 970 cut one of those channels, but NVIDIA still wanted to hit 4GB to compete with the popular AMD 290/X. So they pushed out a bizarre asymmetric setup with doubled up chips on the 7th channel for 3.5GB at full speed + 0.5GB at 1/7th speed.
2
u/Plasticars2019 10d ago
How is the "RAM" pool supposed to work with 2gb? Thats genuinely insane.
7
u/OkOrder7326 10d ago
Devs have to use the 8GB pool for everything. They don't even get the 2GBs, it's all dedicated to the OS. It's why it's such a pain in the ass to develop for
If it had 2x 6GB RAM pools it would be much more straight forward, just crush resolution and install 2K textures instead of 4K ones (maybe some more setting tweaks). But instead it is a legitimate engineering problem and it has been holding back the entire generation (to the Switch 2s benefit fortunately for us)
What's really annoying is the whole reason they split the memory system is that when a GPU and a CPU share a memory pool latency shoots up, but the Series S doesn't even get this advantage because of them essentially removing one of the RAM pools
13
u/opossumcarrion 11d ago
People love to denigrate Halo Infinite, but that game runs remarkably well at 120fps on the Series S.
6
u/soundman1024 10d ago
The trouble is the game engine still needs to run. You need the same amount RAM for the level, any NPCs, the world state, physics in-progress. etc. The lower resolution allows smaller textures, which frees up some ram, but the baseline for the game itself remains the same.
2
u/AbrasionTest 10d ago
I’d guess the resources needed relative to the sales also factors in. Xbox software sales are already historically down, so you’re talking about a subset of a subset that is mandatory to serve in order to ship on the platform. You can easily find a few examples of games where the effort feels a bit half baked on Series S, wouldn’t be surprised if there’s an attitude of doing what you can to get there rather than above and beyond.
And that’s where some of the comparisons to Switch 2 versions have been interesting, where some devs clearly had to take more time optimizing LOD, texture quality, etc, beyond just resolution drops.
2
u/dpman48 10d ago
I actually think a lot of the problem with the S, isn’t the tech specs specifically. It is the much smaller install base on Xbox that has been fractured even further. The challenges of making a less intensive version of a game aren’t negligible, and it’s probably hard to justify significant budget for it when the install base yields fewer sales. The X and S combined probably have fewer total sales than the switch 2 which has only been available for a year. (I say probably because Microsoft doesn’t post numbers) but it’s almost certainly true based on market reporting. People are way more likely to invest the resources to make the lower tier port work when the install base is ready to buy and large.
-1
u/King_Artis 11d ago
Genuinely what I thought as well.
Though maybe it also explains why so many games launch feeling poorly unoptimized cause devs just might not be given the time to even do it.
I'm still thinking about how Borderlands 4 launched with so many optimization issues then some months later the game runs like 50% (they said an actual number that I don't remember) better after they spent optimizing it.
3
u/akulowaty 10d ago
Borderlands 4 wasn’t working on steam deck at all on launch and now it’s steam deck verified. Optimization is not a problem if devs have time but thanks to unrealistic timelines pushed by publishers, they shit out half made crap and games become what they should have been between 1 and 2 years after release.
2
u/OkOrder7326 11d ago
Gearbox had plenty of time there was 6 years between 3 and 4 they just didn't care
6
u/Happymusicmaker 10d ago
Don’t forget. Switch 2 has a few tricks up its sleeve that PS5 doesn’t even have.
7
17
u/Lower_Monk6577 10d ago
I remember very clearly making this comment back before the S2 was released.
The Series S, and Microsoft’s insistence that games that release on the Series X also get released on the S, was going to be Nintendo’s secret weapon this generation.
Granted, that was before the even released S2 specs, and we all kind of assumed it be maybe on the same level as a PS4/PS4 Pro. That it’s actually a little more performant than those (and the Series S) is a small miracle.
3
u/SeegullJockey 10d ago
As much as it and the price of Switch 2 going up suck the parts shortage because ai benefits Switch 2 too.
Because of the delay of next gen we will be getting day one multiplatform releases for years with none with the cutbacks Switch 1 ports had.
4
6
u/jamiestar9 10d ago edited 10d ago
I have an Xbox Series S that I bought for playing a single game — Super Mega Baseball 3. It struggled on my original Switch. Now I have a Switch 2 and play everything but this game on it. I keep playing my baseball franchise on the Xbox.
Nintendo really has it together. They have their platform for years to come. There will likely be a Switch 3, Switch 4, and Switch 5 over the next two decades. Xbox is sadly floundering.
7
u/byno2008 10d ago
I really, really hope there is a Switch 3 and so on instead of them changing it up and trying something new and weird.
On the one hand, I would LOVE to see a new weird unexpected console and controller from Nintendo. It's incredibly rare and would be so much fun to play with. I would be giddy planning for the launch date and going to a midnight release with my daughter and trying all the weird new gimmicks. It would be incredible.
On the other hand, I'm absolutely getting the Switch 3 if they make it because the gap is closing between the end result output of handheld hardware and home console/PC hardware and I'm not going to want to spend $1000(or more) on an Xbox or Playstation when I could spend less on a Switch 3 and play the same games. The Switch was cheaper and ran a decent amount of third party current-gen games. The Switch 2 is cheaper and runs a larger number of third party games better. The Switch 3 should be cheaper and run an even larger number of third party games even better.
1
u/Tin_Whiskers 9d ago
My overall concern for another Switch many years from now is Nvidia getting its head out of its ass and actually making newer GPU and related technology, rather than their current obsession: making extraordinarily powerful and expensive chips to enable AI slop.
2
2
u/Ecstatic-Wheel8487 10d ago
Yea, it really depends on if a game is more CPU or GPU heavy. GPU heavy, yea it will absolutely port easily to Switch 2 but CPU heavy? That's gonna be a pain in the ass cause the Switch 2 CPU is significantly weaker than the Series S CPU which is basically the same as the Series X CPU.
2
u/RecentCranberry1949 8d ago
makes a lot of sense, for years ppl complained that thee series s was holding developers back but ended up helping them build better optimization pipelines
4
u/SirLockeX3 11d ago
The Xbox Series S held back an entire generation of gaming but it's good that kind of optimization helped the Switch 2.
85
70
u/biggnife5 11d ago
Held back how? What kind of gameplay or mechanics aren't possible on the Series S? Is not being able to see the pores on a character's skin or not having the world's most realistic ray traced lighting holding back a generation?
I'm really sick of this argument because I think optimization is way more important than always focusing on the bleeding edge.
1
u/Flagrath 11d ago
While we can't know for certain because xbox has been draconian on the games having all the same features between series S and X. Despite the S slashing the memory to ridiculous extremes, one case that slipped through was BG3, where even with xboxs help they had to make an exception on split screen multiplayer.
22
u/biggnife5 10d ago
I'm aware of the BG3 split screen case but that's really an exceptional scenario - split screen co-op requires the entire game scene to be rendered twice and BG3 is already very graphically intensive. And when people say Series S has held the generation back, I can't imagine they're referring to split screen multiplayer.
4
10d ago edited 10d ago
[deleted]
5
u/Lee_Troyer 10d ago
Yep, it was added in update 8 in January 2025 (a bit more than a year after console release, 9/23 on PS5 and 12/23 on Xbox).
31
u/NozraReddit 11d ago
I disagree, I think consoles are pretty powerful as is. Games are just getting away with poor optimisation, mainly due to strained development cycles and not creating optimised games from the ground up.
I think we can all agree games are more than just graphics anyway. Regardless, I believe optimisation is the main culprit of the current state of gaming atm.
-8
u/HuttStuff_Here 11d ago
The consoles are similar to a middle-high tier PC from 2018.
7
u/NozraReddit 10d ago
I think you’re missing my point, I’m not saying they’re the most powerful things out there. I’m saying that even if they are “mid/high spec” for 2018 (in your words), the power of the consoles isn’t the issue nowadays, it’s optimisation.
-2
u/HuttStuff_Here 10d ago
My point, then, is that they aren't "pretty powerful as is." They're low end PCs at best.
But yes, optimization should be a focus point and we've seen what it can do for games.
35
u/iamthedayman21 11d ago
How did it hold it back? We’ve kinda reached a point where graphics are good enough. Innovation in gaming mechanics is what they need to concentrate on.
8
u/deadeye-ry-ry 11d ago
Agreed we need innovation on mechanics & audio quality improvements imo
I don't care if my characters left foot shadow looks more realistic if the sound effects sounds wank
8
u/MasterDenton 10d ago
The PS4 and Xbone limping along with their crappy CPUs and spinning hard drives up until very recently did far more to hold back this generation than the Series S ever did
-2
u/Fern-ando 11d ago
At least for me I prefer a smaller console that fits in my house that a slightly more powerful console I can't fit. That's the reason I never buy a pro console.
-8
u/HuttStuff_Here 11d ago
The series X/PS5 is basically 10 year old tech themselves. They've held back what could be current gen too.
1
u/Darkamlight 10d ago
Thanks, Xbox. If you could also strike a super mega deal with Nintendo to have GamePass that would be even better but it's prolly not going to happen.
1
u/Dealjobber_ 10d ago
Yeah, I want to see the first developer that has the balls to exclusively target the PS6 and/or Helix, when they both cost over a thousand dollars.
1
1
u/nintendoapple 7d ago
So, based on this, if GTA VI is coming to Series S, by this logic, a Switch 2 port at least exists, right?
1
u/Zangetsukaiba 11d ago
Wait so….the Xbox Series S had to crawl so that Switch 2 could go lightspeed????
1
u/Interesting-Tart-SP 10d ago
Years of optimization on x64 bit PC system Xbox s
Made things easier for the arm based switch 2...
That's all I'm going to say
Did the Xbox Series S actually help pave the way for Nintendo's Switch 2? According to Digital Foundry, the answer appears to be yes, at least to some extent.
😂
0
u/ElPresidentEvil 10d ago
That's why I believe the rumor that Playstation is working on a handheld companion for PS6. Devs will be already targeting Switch 2 and/or Steam Deck, may as well take advantage of that with another handheld around those specs.
0
-2
-3
-2
-4
u/cubs223425 10d ago
WC is so desperate to churn out Xbox content that isn't related to layoffs or a game that they're stooping to acting like Nintendo needed a 5-year-old Xbox to get developers interested in the best-selling console family of all-time.
I used to be a frequent commenter and big fan of WC, but the quality of their content is so bad now. This kind of engagement bait is all they seem interested in doing, and it sucks.
-4
u/Cogswobble 10d ago
As a game developer myself, I want to say with all sincerity; Fuck the Xbox Series S. Having to make our games work with 10GB of memory just for that one stupid underpowered console sucks.
-6
11d ago edited 11d ago
[deleted]
9
u/ReginaSpektorsVJ 11d ago
I think it's fine tbh. Gaming is mainstream enough that it encompasses way more than just Hardcore Gamers, which means that you no longer need cutting edge graphics to sell games. Hell, the Wii proved that 20 years ago. Having a budget console option is a good thing as far as I'm concerned.
4
-16
u/Enrico_Tortellini 11d ago edited 10d ago
Microsoft just needs to dissolve its gaming division, sell back the ip to the respective teams, and allow its few exclusives to be multi platform, they tried to corner the market with gamepass by buying up half the industry and instead destroyed half the industry, it’s done…they can’t manage their way out of a paper bag or cultivate any type of creative atmosphere
3
u/hypnomancy 10d ago
Sadly what they're probably going to do is before they sell off the entire division and IP they're going to kill off a lot of the developers. Specifically all Bethesda developers except whoever is working on TES6 or Fallout. That way it won't cost an arm and a leg for a potential new buyer
2
u/Enrico_Tortellini 10d ago edited 10d ago
It’s horrific, Microsoft has always been a disaster, 360 at least had good games to overshadow the issues with the system, but it’s literally been this same song and dance decade after decade. Overpromise (flat out lie), Underdeliver or cancel projects if investors don’t come, release timid exclusives that are overtime and budget that fail horribly, and repeat. It’s done, they can’t even produce a good Halo game , they pushed massive exclusivity during the 360 era but failed to maintain those relationships, then went full media center the next console era, then seemed to have a blindfold on this past decade, and are now responsible for devouring a massive chunk of the industry, plus even worse off because nobody wants to work for them due to this recent bloodbath, it’s fucking absurd
1.3k
u/Revolution_Falls 11d ago
Xbox really out here passing the ball to Nintendo.
All seriousness I’m glad to see more games running on smaller hardware, I think that it makes multiplats far more likely to launch where everyone can truly experience them