Tetris

Repair should be cheaper so ps4

I never played the PlayStation 1, so maybe that makes this answer worth more or maybe less? Iunno, but I agree that final fantasy 7 and metal gear solid strike me as definitive

My answer would be Metal Gear Solid. But arguments can be made for Crash Bandicoot, Final Fantasy 7, and Spyro The Dragon.

Tetris.

[removed]

Tomb Raider

Harry potter and the philosophers stone ofc

Pepsi man ofc

Pokémon yellow

You tell yourself anything that makes you happy (Deathloop is 60fps on the series s btw and also available on Xbox One via x cloud like with Flight Simulator and Scorn), can you please tell me why God of War is cross gen? I cannot understand it as PlayStation don’t have to develop for anyone other than their own console but they made it cross gen.

I'm going from memory as a teenager back then but I would have to say either the original Mortal Kombat or Streets of Rage 2.

It was Genesis vs SNES. It was back when there really was a console war. I was an avid gamer and had both so I often had to choose which version of a title to buy.

Streets of Rage 2 was like SNES Final Fight turned up to 11. It had hard hitting sound effects, special attacks, signature attacks, multiple characters and one of the most iconic soundtracks in gaming history. It's still dope AF even today.

Mortal Kombat started some shit when it came out. Lots of court cases and censorship discussions resulted from the violence and gore. Sega and Nintendo had to make some decisions when it came to the consoles. Nintendo went the censorship route by changing the fatalities and replacing the blood with sweat. Though it was graphically superior and I think it even sounded better, it had input delay. This was unacceptable for fighting game enthusiasts during the Golden Age of fighting games.

Sega, on the other hand, basically whipped their junk out, threw their hands up in the air and said, "What, bitches!". They kept all of the gore and fatalities. The game didn't look as good, it didn't sound as good but it played well and it maintained the spirit of the game to the best of the console's abilities. It was amazing to have that level of gore and near arcade quality right on the couch. People may not remember, but they took sooooo much heat for this approach in the court of public opinion.

It's hard to imagine now, but the possibility of censorship in video games was a major concern for us back then, especially on consoles. If Sega had caved to the pressure like Nintendo did, gaming today may be different.

So, in the era when Sega's line was "Sega does what Nintendon't", I think these 2 games did exactly that.

FOR ME its probably re2 or mgs1. Two brilliant classics. But honestly, hard to pick just one. Ff7 is top tier too, and hell even the spyro/crash games were solid af

The cherry picking of some points and ignorong others has me rolling, too.

I like the Series S. I think it's pretty awesome for what it's capable of and at it's price point. Microsoft, at some point during development, had to make a decision on whether or not to force developers to make games for both systems (or just develop for Sony, I guess).

That's a tough decision as I think it through. If some games are only available on Series X, then the Series S is really becomes just an Xbox One X Pro. I understand why they would come to an agreement with developers to code for both. The result puts them a little behind the 8 ball 2 years after launch, though.

I also agree that some devs could use this to shed some responsibility when their games suck as a result. This is exactly what we're seeing with Gotham Knights. I'm not sure it's the smartest move to go public with your complaints if you're trying to maintain a good relationship with MS.

This isn't my story. Devs and Phil Spencer have both said it's more difficult to build for to specs as opposed to one. The negative effects of that approach are showing 2 years after launch.

We're talking about current gen at this point, not next gen. The games I've already referenced (that won multiple awards last year) cannot be done on last gen consoles and are not available on last gen consoles as a result. Series X/S have only 3 games that aren't also available on Xbox One. 2 of these games have been released in the last 2 weeks. One is also available on PS5.

That's the information and it all points to Microsoft's requirement for developer's to code towards 2 different specs being a direct reason for them being unable to develop anything current gen exclusive 2 years after launch.

You were wrong then and are still wrong today, it's up to the devs if they want to allow it to hold there game back. Some will some won't

Youre welcome. Have fun with your Xbox!

I think the best part is that it completely undermines his own argument. People ditching Xbox development for PS5 because of the Series S requirement would qualify as hindering development on the platform.

Of course, using his hyper-literal narrow-definitions I imagine his response would be that since they decided to develop for PS5 instead, there is no Xbox development occuring and therefore nothing is being hindered.

Keep in mind this is coming from someone who thinks the Series S complaints are overblown. Not ideal for sure but so far, most of the complaints seem to be devs using it as a shield to excuse poorly optimized games.

I’m not trying to make that point, what I am saying is what makes a game next gen? What is the series S holding back exactly because you seem to know

The developers are not abandoning the series S, that’s my point

This is completely unrelated to anything we're talking about. Series S is holding back developers from making current gen games. That's a fact and that's the point of this thread. If you want to make your own thread that you think Series S is better than PS5 because it has more 120fps games (at 1080p) then go ahead.

Premium gaz 4 arson

You are technically correct, Microsoft doesn't have a gun to their heads so they aren't forcing the devs. But come on, can't you see how silly it is to get caught up in those semantics?

The conversation is clearly about Microsoft forcing any XSX release to work on the XSS. If you want to take "forcing" that literally it's your perogative but really besides the point.

>they can just develop for PS5 instead can’t they?

Wouldn't people abandoning Xbox development in favour of the PS5 because of the Series S requirement just illustrate how the platform is being hindered by it?

I know! I almost fell out of my chair when I read that one.

PS5 games that can run at 120fps, 30 as of 21st October, series S games that can run at 120fps, 52 as of 22 April (sorry couldn’t find an updated list so there will be some missing)

Just so you know, I have a PS5, A series X and S and a switch, so I have no corporate loyalty.