What do you think of PS4 Pro/Xbox One X being used for reviews/coverage?

Avatar image for barrock
Barrock

4185

Forum Posts

133

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 2

Polygon has a pre-review up for Assassin's Creed Origins and they note they are playing the game on the Xbox One X. Someone in the comments noted they thought it was disingenuous to play on the X because no one will even have access to the system when the game comes out. This of course turned into a console wars style argument.

In some Quick Looks they often note they are playing on a Pro. I can't help but feel this is a hindrance because the vast majority of people still have base PS4/Xbox One units and preview coverage on the improved consoles might not necessarily be representative of the final product for many.

What do you think? Obviously the newer systems deserve coverage. I just can't help but feel they shouldn't be the main focus yet. And I know PC and various system builds is a whole additional can of worms.

Avatar image for johntunoku
JohnTunoku

418

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

I think they should play on the best system available but test a bit on vanilla, just to see if there are any significant issues.

Avatar image for ntm
NTM

12222

Forum Posts

38

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#3  Edited By NTM

Yeah, they need to do both because there's no telling otherwise how it'll run for a lot of people. That said, Digital Foundry is often a good place to go. Consumers need to look elsewhere than reviews perhaps if you use reviews as a way to purchase games. I think the PS4 Pro thing is less of an issue. We'll have to see about the X.

Avatar image for kevin_cogneto
Kevin_Cogneto

1886

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

For decades, PC games have routinely been reviewed on high-end PCs that many gamers can't afford or don't feel the need to buy, and these reviewers rarely felt the need to disclose which hardware the game was played on. Unless otherwise stated, it was always just been assumed that all PC reviews were played on the best hardware available. I don't see why this is any different. This is a non-issue as far as I'm concerned.

Avatar image for ll_exile_ll
ll_Exile_ll

3215

Forum Posts

25

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 2

#5  Edited By ll_Exile_ll  Online

Doesn't seem any different than an outlet doing a review on a beefy PC with all the settings maxed out. The majority of PC players won't have a system like that, but I don't recall people generally having an issue with those situations in the past.

Personally, I don't see a problem with coverage of games being shown on the most powerful hardware available.

Avatar image for mike
mike

18011

Forum Posts

23067

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: -1

User Lists: 6

I wonder what the count is on YouTube channels that do graphics comparisons across these different systems? It has to be in the 50's, right? That information is probably easily accessible for anyone who cares about it.

Avatar image for oursin_360
OurSin_360

6636

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#7  Edited By OurSin_360

Well i guess for the x they need to do both since its not out otherwise just do a ps4 pro and maybe do a quick to see if performance is different on a regular. Its pretty impossible as it is to review the same game on all consoles, then you add in console versions its just ridiculous. I mean doesnt the one S also have slightly better performance than a regular version? Its kinda ridiculous tbh.

Its like reviewing a PC game on every possible graphics card and cpu setup etc.

Avatar image for pavlovianhell
PavlovianHell

38

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#8  Edited By PavlovianHell

They need to also play it on the base systems long enough to get a basic understanding of any differences in performance, visual differences if any beyond resolution, and whether said performance (And constantly changing resolution) Have any adverse effects on the game experience. From there the user can watch a video that corraborates what they said, and decide what effect if any that would have for them personally. So not an entire seperate review, but just a thorough aside.

The notification that they are playing on the pro version is nice, but if you dont have a pro or one, useless. 'The experience you have will vary from ours, but by how much you wont know!!!'. But hey, this generation likes loot boxes right?

@oursin_360 said:

Its like reviewing a PC game on every possible graphics card and cpu setup etc.

No... no... no its not.

4 is not the same thing as 10,000

For decades, PC games have routinely been reviewed on high-end PCs that many gamers can't afford or don't feel the need to buy, and these reviewers rarely felt the need to disclose which hardware the game was played on. Unless otherwise stated, it was always just been assumed that all PC reviews were played on the best hardware available. I don't see why this is any different. This is a non-issue as far as I'm concerned.

Because it has always been different. Consoles are not PC's. With A PC, you can change out a cpu, or gpu, or some ram, and improve performance. That performance was variable has always been a caveat of PC gaming, it came with the territory. Consoles, have always been closed systems, and thus every copy played the same on every console, every copy of a game on ps4 pro, is going to play the same on every other ps4 pro, but not on ps4 vanilla, however every ps4 vanilla will play that game the same as every other ps4 vanilla. I'ts why performance has always been a bigger deal on consoles, (and why it was so easy for marketing to exploit, all the way until it exploded in their grubby little faces).

Avatar image for liquiddragon
liquiddragon

4245

Forum Posts

978

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 2

User Lists: 18

They should cover the game on w/e platform they get the game on but if they have a choice, I think they should cover the game on the most dominate platform and the most popular sku aka the standard PS4.

I'm bias here 'cause that's what I have but that's where most ppl would benefit. Ppl like me, we don't care about hard numbers, we just want to see how the game runs. It doesn't make sense to me to send us somewhere to figure it out when you can send a smaller player base to do that, a base I might add that probably cares more about hard numbers anyway.

To compare the variables in PC builds to the limited numbers of consoles skus is...lol...why do ppl make this argument.

Avatar image for nodima
Nodima

3306

Forum Posts

24

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 13

User Lists: 0

#10  Edited By Nodima

Personally, I don't care. I own a 720p television and my iMac is from 2008 so I'm already well aware that whatever I'm watching is not as crisp and dope as it is for the people who work for Giant Bomb. Four out of five times I'm barely watching what they're doing anyway unless it's a game I really have an interest in, all GB content is a podcast with an optional visual element in my opinion.

I should also add that I've always found slowdown to be a somewhat charming aspect of the video game experience for whatever reason, and oftentimes prefer games at 30FPS to 60FPS in the limited times I've had the option - The Last of Us Remastered, for example. So I'm really not coming to Giant Bomb for an accurate representation of my experience with video games at all.

Avatar image for clagnaught
clagnaught

2466

Forum Posts

401

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 1

User Lists: 19

For the sake of consistency, it would be ideal for reviewers and site coverage to use the newest systems. Going back and forth between "This is a Pro / This is an original PS4" or "This is an original Xbox One / This is an Xbox One X" would get old, or having to make that distinction multiple times is on paper confusing.

I don't care about Assassin's Creed and know nothing about Origins, but the Xbox One X could create a unique problem, if other versions didn't run that well. Like what if there was a major performance difference between an Xbox One and an Xbox One X? Even if that is not the case, it is also weird to judge a game based on a console most people are probably not going to get. Even the ones who do, that is still two or so weeks away. From listening to Jeff talk about reviewing different versions of games, he said a lot of the time the review copy of the game tended to be the most popular version (so people would receive a PS2 version, even though the Xbox version may be better). That review of Origins is arguably going to be based on the least popular version of the game and in general the least relevant. In the end, this doesn't seem like that big of a deal; it's just interesting timing.

Of course, you can probably just go to Digital Foundry and look at every conceivable version of this game and figure it out for yourself if there's any major differences and all that.

Avatar image for mems1224
mems1224

2518

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#12  Edited By mems1224

Its no different than reviewing a game that they played on PC with ultra settings. As long as they spend time with the base versions and make note of any major differences I don't see a problem with it.

Avatar image for diz
diz

1394

Forum Posts

961

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 2

User Lists: 4

On a lot of PC demos, they often show how different/lower graphics settings affect the game. i'd have thought the best thing to do for the console audience would be to play on the most popular systems for them. Ideally, some footage of one of the "base" consoles, then footage of the "de-luxe" consoles for comparison would be good for us.

Until they have 4k playback as a default and everyone views GB content in HDR, showing what these consoles are capable of will be lost to the codec.

Avatar image for teddie
Teddie

2220

Forum Posts

20

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

Don't worry, if a AAA game runs like shit on something you'll hear about it all over the internet.

Avatar image for geirr
geirr

4060

Forum Posts

717

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 1

User Lists: 5

I think that's fine since I usually check for stuff like this before I buy things.

Avatar image for atastyslurpee
ATastySlurpee

689

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

I think they should play on the best system available but test a bit on vanilla, just to see if there are any significant issues.

Pretty much my thought.

Avatar image for quipido
Quipido

1618

Forum Posts

5417

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 1

They should cover the game on w/e platform they get the game on but if they have a choice, I think they should cover the game on the most dominate platform and the most popular sku aka the standard PS4.

I'm bias here 'cause that's what I have but that's where most ppl would benefit. Ppl like me, we don't care about hard numbers, we just want to see how the game runs. It doesn't make sense to me to send us somewhere to figure it out when you can send a smaller player base to do that, a base I might add that probably cares more about hard numbers anyway.

To compare the variables in PC builds to the limited numbers of consoles skus is...lol...why do ppl make this argument.

I am a PS4 Pro user and I agree with you completely, they should quicklook/review on the less powerful console. The prevailing sentiment among the crew is the Pro is not worth the money, yet they use it constantly, even at home (I understand the difference between a profesional opinion/recomendation for others and having one for themselfves though, I myself bought a regular PS4 as a gift to a couple as their first console just this year.) I am really curious what happens when the X is out, as far as the site coverage goes. And in longer term I am curious how long before X games are no longer compatioble with One/S.

Avatar image for mattgiersoni
MattGiersoni

587

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 1

#18  Edited By MattGiersoni

I have a standard PS4 and I honestly don't care when they review stuff on more powerful systems. It's the same game on all of them, it's just a difference in visuals and/or performance but it plays and is the same game essentially on all of them. If I want a tech and visuals analysis I'll go and watch or read sites dedicated to that like digital foundry or NX gamer. I guess a reviewer could play a few hours on a less powerful system/more powerful to see and note the differences if there are any and note that in a review, but the system of choice for the review shouldn't matter. If there is a controversy and one performs badly or has huge visual differences, I'm sure most reviewers will note that.

Avatar image for sarcasticmudcrab
SarcasticMudcrab

546

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

Its no, actually less different than any PC review, it doesn't matter although it should be stated.

Avatar image for randalian
randalian

57

Forum Posts

2023

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 2

User Lists: 7

As long as they note what spec they played the majority of the game on and test on other hardware as well it shouldn't be a problem. If I know that they played most of the game on a pro but tested on the PS4 regular I can be mostly assured that they will have had no issues on either, or that information is somewhere in the written review. Reviews of Breath of The Wild noted that the WiiU version of the game had significant performance issues in certain areas that were not present in the Switch version. This should be the way Pro / X vs PS4 / One are handled.

Avatar image for scoobatuba
ScoobaTuba

15

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

As others have said as long as I know what console they are playing on when they review it then I'm fine. If there are performance issues that has to do with other consoles then I'm sure somebody on the internet will point it out. I usually have more than one source for reviews anyway.

Avatar image for coldwolven
Cold_Wolven

2582

Forum Posts

3

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

I think they should play it on whatever system they have available to them with whatever console version the publisher gives them. Giant Bomb have in the past said what the differences are if any between the Pro and the base console when playing a game.

Avatar image for hippie_genocide
hippie_genocide

2561

Forum Posts

1

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 2

Playing a game for review on unreleased hardware is a little weird, but that is a review that isn't just going to be consumed in the next few weeks but potentially for years to come. Personally, I don't really mind it. Just note what console you played it on and I can take it from there. Digital Foundry is a thing.

Avatar image for deactivated-5aa7cc9892e50
deactivated-5aa7cc9892e50

15

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

Feel like it is honestly a miss representation of any average Joe that can't afford the better consoles, it should be worked with two people or more people the main reviewer should honestly play on the best system of course. However there should be people playing just as long on the other two variant consoles (Xbox One S, Xbox One, PS4 Slim, PS4) with other people giving additional notes of potential problems on the less powerful hardware. That is if you want to get really technical, but not many reviewers or company's will honestly do such a thing.

That is where I believe DigitalFoundry is really benefiting from doing these comparison's, granted it isn't a full review of the game but they are at least showing it and discussing potential issues in all console comparison's. Although this is missing the PS4 Slim.

Loading Video...

Avatar image for junkerman
Junkerman

682

Forum Posts

371

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 7

User Lists: 5

I think they should be using the base console. The vast majority of consumers are not going to be upgrading until the next generation unless this one maybe runs as long as the last one did or longer.

Avatar image for retrometal
RetroMetal

874

Forum Posts

81

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 2

I don't have a problem with it.

They should state that it is on the PS4 or XB1X and maybe discuss what the differences would be on the regular PS4 or XB1.

Other than that, why wouldn't they want to use the newer hardware?

I don't read PC Gamer, but do they review games on the PC with 5 year old video cards or the newer ones?

Avatar image for dagas
dagas

3684

Forum Posts

851

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 1

User Lists: 8

I think they should play on the most common version of the console and then try a bit on the Pro/X to see what changes. Many of us don't have the Pro/X version of the console a and would like to know how the game plays on the regular system.

Avatar image for geraltitude
GERALTITUDE

5991

Forum Posts

8638

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 17

User Lists: 2

I don’t think it’s realistic for most sites (definitely not GB) to review / preview multiple versions of a game. Luckily, Digital Foundry, IGN and GameSpot all do pretty good comparison videos. Sometimes they talk over them, sometimes they let the images speak for themselves. For those who care about the differences, I think this is a pretty good solution.