Remedy: Xbox Series S Optimization Isn't as Simple as Lowering Resolution and Texture Quality - News
by William D'Angelo , posted on 03 July 2021 / 2,788 Views
Remedy Entertainment communications director Thomas Puha speaking with IGN and transcribed by Wccftech discussed the Xbox Series S and its lower specs. He said to optimize games for the Xbox Series S requires more than just lowering the resolution and texture quality.
"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," said Puha.
"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."
Puha did add it should be easier to take into account the Xbox Series S when developing a new game with those specs in mind, compared to optimizing older games like Remedy's Control.
"It's a lot more difficult to engineer an old game to make sure it works on everything, but now that we're building the future games and we know these are the systems it has to run on, we take that into account from day one and and we can ensure that all platforms have as good of an experience as possible.
"We appreciate that there's a lower barrier of entry for an action experience with the Xbox Series S, but the more hardware you have, the more you kind of have to ultimately compromise a little bit when when you are like a smaller studio like us where we just can't spend so much time making sure that all these platforms are super good. Of course we need to do that but but there's just a difference in doing that because it takes a huge amount of resources, not just engineering but QA, the huge QA overhead to test so many different platforms."
A life-long and avid gamer, William D'Angelo was first introduced to VGChartz in 2007. After years of supporting the site, he was brought on in 2010 as a junior analyst, working his way up to lead analyst in 2012. He has expanded his involvement in the gaming community by producing content on his own YouTube channel and Twitch channel dedicated to gaming Let's Plays and tutorials. You can contact the author at wdangelo@vgchartz.com or on Twitter @TrunksWD.
More Articles
The stuff about QA is absolutely spot on. The SS creates a lot of extra workload for a lot of extra people.
Important to point out that saying that configuring the game for Series S "is not as simple as just decreasing the textures and resolution" is not the same as saying it holds other console platforms back ipso facto, because resolution and textures are not the only things that scale on the GPU and memory. Geometry, LOD, Lighting, filtering, anti-aliasing, AO, shadows. Puha mentions ray tracing. This is within reason of course; cutting-edge PC hardware will surely be held back by the Series S in terms of graphics engines. I do find the suggestion though that the Series X/PS5 have so much left to give here after doing 4x the resolution of Series S, and at higher settings, that they'd be "held back" rather... brave... when describing what amounts to low-mid-range GPU performance these days.
Good points, and I would also add that it's not just about the SS alone holding things back. For certain games/aspects the SS could have net advantages when scaled to it. But the very fact of additional SKU/unique performance target means the total game develoment must be done on basis of game concept working across least common denominator of all SKUs, even though all weaknesses won't be in play at once for any given platform. I think in general it creates tendency for less optimization since there is increased costs that aren't compensated by market share. Of course 1st party is other story, but I mean for 3rd party... and I think that has played out in some of performance analysis for XSX which hasn't always fulfilled expecations. Because it's being built on chassis that is easily portable to XSS, i.e. least common denominator.
Anyways, it is what it is, I think MS viewed it as play for marketshare by offering lower price point that essentially fulfills role of lastgen product in terms of price point, although I don't see any results that show great success there, 1:2 at early launch phase vs PS5 including XSS just isn't anything to brag about, and there clearly is less organic demand for XSS whose inventory is easy to find compared to other SKUs. Although I guess the test is when MS pulls support to last gen and XSS is the low budget way to play new games. Will they do that earlier because of XSS? We'll see.
True, but the dev specifically said it holds back because it puts a baseline that is lower than the other 2 consoles and not everything can be scalled.
If Series S will hold back Series X, time will tell.
But is clear that Sony made the right decision of making PS5 digital and disk versions with the same specs.
Outside of the graphics, where does the Series S hold back the Series X?
what make me laugh so hard is that before it was all hypothetical, now we actually can see every series x game working on series s without any problems, and people are still pushing the idiocy that the series s is a problem
Hold on guys let's wait for the dev on MS payroll. He's gona tell us the unbiased truth.
We literally already have 100+ titles that work on Series X working on Series S right now, just fine, with a slightly lower rez. OOPS. This isn't a hypothetical, what the Remedy guy says is proven false by what has already been released. He's a communications director, not a technical one, and he has no idea what he is talking about.
Of course it's not that simple.
Let's not forget this part of the interview: "Puha did add it should be easier to take into account the Xbox Series S when developing a new game with those specs in mind, compared to optimizing older games like Remedy's Control. " Developing for the Series S will become easier as developers move away from cross-gen games.
Easier yes, but it will mean to make something work on series s, they will initially have to plan for that console in mind, as base, and then add on top for higher end end consoles. That might mean lowerinf expectations or trying to be less ambitious from the start to ensure it works on series s. This is probably how all multiplats will be from now, design the game for the lowest end first. Look at cyberpunk for example, they designed the game with high end specs in mind,pc. and then had consoles to deal with.
Remedy - Series S requires more work to optimize especially with cross gen games. could be easier in the future.
None Xbox Users - Series S is under powered and holding the gen back! End of days.
Me - Since when is the Series S the lead platform for Gen 9?
You need to make sure your game works on the lowest-end platform, no Series X can be released if there is no Series S version
Games will still work on the Series S, it doesnt have to be fully optimised for the XSS, thats up to the devs on how much work they want to put in. No different when running a game on a 3090 to a 3060. Its the same thing. Little effort little results.
So it hold things down and isn't just a reduction of pixel count? Who would guess.
Yup, clear from day 1, despite moronic "the gpu power means games scale perfectly for the resolution" takes. Anyways, obvious why MS did it, it could help increase marketshare by targetting lower price point, and that's most attractive to side who trails the #1 by 1:3. Not that I think it's working, but it is what it is. Sony's choice to only differentiate by discless SKU with same performance means better optimizations can be expected, and budget for exclusives can be easier controlled. Of course MS isn't as concerned by budgets.
Yep, It have a clear reason for the cheap Series S combined with Gamepass plan. But we had so many "so-called dev expert" on the site and even DF (or Phil Spencer) claiming Series S wouldn't hold anything at all.
Tell us Mr expert, where does the Series S hold back the Series X and PS5 besides the graphics? Curious to hear your thoughts
What he is saying is total nonsense, you'll notice the lack of specifics. Let's interview their technical team, not their communications director, who doesn't know what he is talking about. The Series S has the same powerful CPU as the Series X. The same storage. It takes 18 times the GPU power just to get from Switch level 720p/30 to Series X level 4k/60. The small 3x difference in comparison is not a problem (but the Switch's very slow CPU and storage is).
I can build a PC, put a video card that is 3x faster in one compared to the other, and they play the exact same games. Compare the 1660 ti vs the 3080, the 1660 ti will play the same games at a higher or same frame rate at 1080p than the 3080 will play at 4k.
The Series S is next gen, WE WISH Nintendo would just release something similar. 8 core Ryzen 3000 CPU and a 2GB/s SSD... The GPU is the same gen as the one in the Series X and has the same feature set.
Mate get out of here with your common sense and logic. People need to complain about something and the Series S is an easy target, what else would they complain about?
The lack of AAA games?
I think they might of fixed that problem looks at Bethesda buyout
As far as I'm aware zero games where added to the Xbox after the buy out. But after a year or two you might get one.
I really hope you don't take your posts this serious
VGCHARTZ is a toxic Nintendo cesspool, I believe I just saw Microsoft win two awards for game of the year last year, for Ori and Flight Simulator. Oops. Zero games.
Is the 1660ti gonna be able to run demanding games 7-8 years from now fine? It could end up being able to but the fact that big games will need to be optimized for the already low end GPU in the Series S and lower amount of ram that's also slow ram for the vast majority of this decade is an understandable thing to be concerned about I think.
Erm you know that not all PCs have more capable hardware than whats in the Series S right?
Yeah but unlike those PCs multiplat developers are forced to spend time optimizing for it and make sure it runs on the Series S. This isn't an issue right now but years from now I think it could be.
They aren't forced to optimise for the Series S either. It just means it will run like shit if they dont. Thats up to the developers.
It has to at least function in someway on it where for low end PC's there's no requirement for games to run at all so that is a difference there. My hope is developers let their games ran badly on it instead of ever compromising on something but I don't expect all of them to do that and I could see Microsoft potentially punishing developers who release poorly running Series S versions of their games. Now it is entirely possible everything turns out fine and big games years from now don't get held back at all by it and that would be great. Until the full effects of the Series S existing come into fruition I'll remain worried but won't get annoyed that it exists unless some proven negative effects occur.
Where exactly does the Series S hold back the PS5/XSX outside of graphics which can be toned down?
I'm not sure what exactly would get held back if that happened but I've seen developers say mixed things on it which makes me concerned. In this case it isn't a developer but various past examples come to mind.
Developers are complaining because its just more work to put in, not because the hardware isn't capable. Worst case scenario, the S will just down tone the graphics to accommodate. It doesn't hold developers back interms of expanding their imagination if that's what you are worried about.
Its a Series X with a low end GPU instead of a high end GPU. No different to how a low end and high end PC work. Lower the settings to have it run on the weaker hardware.
There is a limit to lowering settings. A GPU from over 20 years ago can't handle demanding modern games no matter how low the settings are turned down. It'd require a complete rework of a lot of stuff and a lot of work in general to get it to work on something that weak. Of course the GPU in the Series S is far, far superior to any GPU that old but my point is that Microsoft probably tried to go as weak as they possibly could without causing a problem but since people can make mistakes it's possible they went a tad too far. I'm not saying they for sure did, just that I think it's a possibility so I will wait and see how it plays out before being ok with the Series S existing if things turns out ok or being bothered by its existence if things turn out poorly.
The Series S GPU is in the same family line as whats in the Series X and PS5 so its definitely in a different scenario than comparing a GPU 20 years ago.
Devs just have to use more resources to optimise if not they will end up with a version not running at its best protential on the S
The bright side to it is an increased audience due to the lower price point which could lead to possibly more software sales that could accommodate the extra work. The S can have a huge price advantage especially on future console sales compared to the next closest thing.
It existing does have benefits for sure and hopefully in the long term they outweigh any negatives that might arise. I do wish Microsoft didn't mandate that a game needs to run on both since the option to only release on the Series X would be nice to have to help push games years from now further for any developer who'd prefer to not have to put extra resources in for Series S optimization.
Series S wont hold back the Series X and PS5. It rans the exact same features and tech, it just has to do it with less fidelity. There is nothing the X and 5 can do that the S can't, it just does it at a lesser experience which is the entire point of the system.
It can't run stuff that requires a GPU as beefy as in the PS5 or Series X GPU to run but if that does become a factor it won't be for a good while. If you're sure it won't hold things back that's fine, as I've said I'll be taking a wait and see approach.
It can, it just needs to be scaled down. Which is exactly what its meant to do. Weather its resolution, fps, detail, draw distance, lighting, shadowing, Raytracing etc. Cut backs will be made, some extreme, some minor.
Holding others back and creating more work for devs are two very different things here. But as you said, take the wait and see approach.
I assume you wrote similar comment when we heard the non-specific non-sense about "3x GPU power allowing perfect scaling with same peformance". Oh wait, you're pushing the same meaningless illusions yourself. Why do you even divert to talking about whether you can play the game or not? That was nowhere mentioned, he is talking about difficulty of optimizing for it and all SKUs. That of course isn't relatable to consumer perspective. He specifically says when they build development around it from the outset it will be less problematic, that of course implying the game's core premise is constrained by the lowest common denominator (not just for XSS, but between all SKUs as a whole).
But I'm sure he will work around and say nowhere was promised that it would only be a reduction of 1/3 in pixel count and everything else kept (when showed the results).
The Series S has the same base hardware as the PS5 and Series X, that is why you don't have to develop just for the Series S. It is JUST the GPU that is different, and the GPU is the same RDNA also, every feature set is the same. He is a communications director, not a technical one, and he has no idea what he is talking about.
