Reportedly, some third-party video game publishers aren’t sure why they should keep making and supporting games for Xbox consoles due to poor sales in Europe.

  • w2tpmf@sh.itjust.works
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    7
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    7 months ago

    Because it actually fits on a shelf, it’s way quieter, and can be thrown in a backpack if you want to take it places.

    Those are the things I miss after upgrading from the S to the X.

    Also “why not get an X and not use disks”… Well why pay double if you don’t need to use disks? The performance difference isn’t huge except on a few games made to utilize the X.

    • fuckwit_mcbumcrumble@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      4
      ·
      7 months ago

      If there was no S then all games would have been optimized to the Xs level. Instead the S is compare able to the older Series X. The smaller form factor vs the mini fridge is basically the only thing going for it.

      • fartsparkles@sh.itjust.works
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        5
        ·
        edit-2
        7 months ago

        Indeed, a lot of people seem to only show awareness that the S doesn’t have a disc drive with no mention of how the S has a lower clock speed on the CPU, a 3x slower GPU, and 6GB less memory.

        As a developer, those two SKUs are wildly different and are effectively different consoles. To have a smaller install base and multiple hardware specs, I can totally understand why developers are eager to give up on Xbox (I wonder how many devs had to write specific shaders for the S since the compute speed is so much slower).

        Sony only differed SKUs on disc drive alone (which makes a lot of sense since even the people in this thread seem to have made their purchase of an S primarily on that feature).