Indeed. And I think the short answer to the question is actually "yes". It's a great system for $300. It just seems like it would cost more than a Series X over the course of its life span for many people.

Yes but as soon as you buy memory for it you're in Series X territory. Also, buying a few $5 or $10 used games (or trading/borrowing) that would otherwise be $60 digitally closes the gap.

They're not though.

Sure they are

But the PS exclusives aren't on PC...

That's not true and the logic doesn't make sense even if it was. Xbox games are already on PC so, with that same logic, doesn't that make Xbox useless now?

This is wrong but ok.

PC doesn't get exclusives for 1 to 3 years after release, if ever. PC already has Xbox games since they have zero exclusives. PS5 with PS Premium and a gaming PC with Game Pass both connected to an LG Oled in the living room is the setup.

Ps5 definitely if you already have a PC or an Xbox one.

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.

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.

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.

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

Sure there are deals. PS Plus usually goes on sale for $40 on black Friday. We'll see what they do this year. For accurate comparisons, we have to go with advertised prices.

Uh huh, sure.

Just an FYI, Series S is holding developers back from doing anything innovative and that's why Microsoft's's current gen systems are stuck making last gen games even 2 years after launch. That's what this thread is about.

I was actually referring to Rocksteady calling it a potato but ok.

I'm not here to field your redundant questions. I don't know what "next gen" will be. Current gen is PS5/Series X. You can tell when you see zero load times in games like Demon's Souls Remake, Returnal, Ratchet and Clank, etc. 4k at 60fps is another trademark with some having lower res options at 120fps like Nioh 2. Those are some examples of what makes a game current gen. I have no idea what next gen will be.

For $100 per year, Extra is 400+ games plus the 3 - 5 games per month and another 19 games for PS5 collection. It averages to about $8 per month. It's about the same amount of games as Game Pass Ultimate which is $15 a month. Game Pass gives day one games but for almost double the yearly price.

For an extra $20 a year, Premium gives you an extra 300+ games for what averages out to be $1.50 a month. Most of (but not all) these games are PS3 games that require streaming and, as a result, are lower quality and may even have some lag. Imo, there are plenty of good games that are unaffected at it's still worth the extra $20 per year. This package is essentially close to 800 games for $120 a year which averages to $10 per month (the same price as Game Pass PC and its 425ish games).

Well yes they are. That's...the story. Developers (not fanboys) are complaining that Microsoft is requiring them to design to 2 different specs. The Series S AND the Series X. If you want to make a game for Series S, Microsoft is requiring that you make a Seirs S version.

You're missing the point completely. Sony isn't forcing developers to make all games compatible with under-performing hardware like Microsoft is.

Sony is the only system that currently has any truly current gen software 2 years after launch.

I'm not making an "argument", just stating facts pertinent to OP's post. Your point that there are good games on older generations is obvious and irrelevant to this thread. Nobody in this thread is saying otherwise. This thread is simply recognizing the fact that Series S has held Xbox development back while Sony has already generated GOTY candidates and award winners that are current gen only. This could include current gen/PC exclusive since xbox will never make truly exclusive goty candidate since they will all be available for PC on release.

There is no console war.

Technically it's not the Series S holding games back but Microsoft's requirement forcing devs to develop for it.

2 years into current gen and Xbox still has only 3 titles that aren't also available on Xbox One. Flight Simulator, Scorn and Gotham Knights. 2 of those were released within the past 2 weeks and one of those is also on PS5. If devs would have been allowed to make games for Series X without the Series S requirement, they may have had a more modern lineup.

Meanwhile, PS5 exclusives like Returnal, Kena, Ratchet and Clank and (exlusive at the time) Deathloop cleaned up various gaming awards last year.

The Series S is a super cool system for what it's capable of in such a small box but, in hindsight, it appears Microsoft's implementation of it has held them back big time.

What can the Series S do that your PC can't?

Don't get a ps5 digital. It's only $100 difference. You find 2 bargain games that are otherwise $60 digitally and you've paid off the $100 drive. If the PS5 digital is on the table, get the disc version.

I almost feel the same way about series s vs series x. Although the price difference is $200, these are 2 completely different systems. Whereas, the only difference between the PS5 models is the drive, the difference between the Series S and X is a drive and performance. For the price, the Series S is pretty remarkable. But, as soon as you add extra storage or buy a few games digitally that could have been bought for less used, then you've blown through that $200 savings and could have bought the better performing Series X.

I'm not following the comment you made about completing your Sony console collection. Do you already have a PS5 disc version? If so, get a ps2 for $50 and an Xbox series X.

No need for Xbox if you have a PC. You already have access to everything xbox has to offer. Go with PS5. Game Pass PC with PS Plus Premium on PS5 is what I use and it's pretty amazing.

Get the ps5 then. You can play every xbox game on your One S except Flight Simulator, Scorn and Gotham Knights. They won't look as good as they will on Series X but you have access to them. Anything else that is current gen only is on PS5.

PS5 starts you off with 19 classics + 3-5 games per month if you get the base $60 subscription. The $100 subscription will get you this plus another 400 games. Many if which will are the PS exclusives you've been missing.