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.

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments

[–] w2tpmf@sh.itjust.works 6 points 7 months ago (1 children)

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 4 points 7 months ago (1 children)

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 5 points 7 months ago* (last edited 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).