Baldur's Gate 3 Coming to Series X and S Later This Year, Parity Clause Lessened

Sven writes: "Super happy to confirm that after meeting @XboxP3
yesterday, we’ve found a solution that allows us to bring Baldur’s Gate 3 to Xbox players this year still, something we’ve been working towards for quite some time.

All improvements will be there, with split-screen coop on Series X. Series S will not feature split-screen coop, but will also include cross-save progression between Steam and Xbox Series."

[cloud 279]

Xbox parity between X&S has been dropped for Baldur's gate 3

[crazyCoconuts]

So the solution they found is for Phil to admit he was wrong

[darthv72]

...not exactly. Phil never said the S had to have split screen. that was Larian's call in wanting to make it work. Like i said before, the core game is the only requirement on this parity clause. Meaning the game itself, not play styles that may be optional to the player. split screen is not required for this, its completely playable single player. The S can do online co-op still so really it was Larian who decided to drop the local co-op. Phil was completely fine with that because the core game is still the same.

[Goosejuice]

Then why did Halo drop split screen as well? If series x could do it but no s then why not just do the same? They have a parity clause with series s. Idk why u acting like larian is to blame here.

If this was an average game we probably wouldn't be seeing this but seeing as this game has a great chance at being game of the year and missing on xbox is the only reason why we r seeing the change here.

[darthv72]

@goose... halo split screen worked on the series s. It ran pretty good but maybe pretty good was not good enough or maybe it had more to do with how it ran on the prior xbox one... I think they should have still brought it out.

[Christopher]

***...not exactly. Phil never said the S had to have split screen***

Sure, Phil never said parity between machines and doesn't run Xbox now. Phil exists in this liminal space between being in charge of Xbox and not in charge of Xbox so that he can do both depending on what narrative we want to go with here. /s

***So the solution they found is for Phil to admit he was wrong ***

Over 5m sales in only 2 weeks for a 'niche' product will do that to you as you realize it's about to be an unintentional exclusive for your competition.

[Goosejuice]

@darth The fact is they dropped it for both consoles though shows that the parity clause is real on that front. I'm glad they r making an exception to it but it should have never been in place anyways.
With that said all u xbox peeps, bg3 is one of the best games I have played in last decade so enjoy it and support it. I fully planned on playing starfield when it comes out but now I'm probably going to wait a little until I'm done with this game.

[4Sh0w]

I for one hate they even created the S, its just problematic & not worth the headache, next gen should be next gen with the best *cost vs specs console you can make at the time= Series X only...but I digress whatever the reason its spilled milk now.

Now with BG3 confirmed on the Series X with split screen, thats good for Xbox gamers who care. Personally it wasn't a big deal for me, since I can't really forsee when I would use split screen really & I'm not too big a fan of top down games like this anyway but I've played a few that were good, so with all the praise eventually I'll get around to checking this game out.

[IRetrouk]

Not really true is it
https://ibb.co/m07GB9q
https://ibb.co/qDVmk7t
https://ibb.co/nPBxYBX

[dumahim]

"Phil never said the S had to have split screen. "

No, he didn't say it but it was well known that there had to feature parity between S and X. So now they say split screen is no longer a feature?

https://learn.microsoft.com...
"Ensure that identical game modes are offered across console types within the generation."

[maniacmayhem]

@dumahim

You're taking a standard that is stated under the Generations Requirements, so games that are across Xbox One and S/X must have parity.

The title specifically states:

"To maintain consistency across console generations, games must:"

So Darth is right, no where does it state that S had to have feature parity with X.

I'm thinking this was a gaming community theory that was states so many times that it became a fact among us. A literal mandela effect.

[S2Killinit]

Can you imagine Sony dropping support for the PS5 disc-less?

[lelo2play]

I'm curious to see how this runs on the Series S.
The PC version of the game, the 3rd act runs like crap, very resource hog.

[Obscure_Observer]

"Xbox parity between X&S has been dropped for Baldur's gate 3"

Amazing News!

[Brazz]

Not for series S owner. They purchased a console that promised parity, and that's not the case anymore.
Soon other games Will also "not have party" and Series S owner are the one that are going to be "cheated" here. I dare say, there is space for legal actions on this one!

[mkis007]

Was parity promised on either the s box or the game box?

[Profchaos]

@brazz the old saying holds true you get what you pay for

[S2Killinit]

I paid for xbox’s next gen console. They said it was going to be the same console. They tracked its sales as if it was the same console. They said it was going to have parity. They said it was going to have the SAME games. They even had a collective name called “xbox Series”.

But I bought the series S because MS said it was their next gen console! What happens to me? I believed MS and bought into their console.

[Obscure_Observer]

@S2Killinit

"But I bought the series S because MS said it was their next gen console! What happens to me? I believed MS and bought into their console."

What you gonna do about it?

[S2Killinit]

@Obscure

Class action law suit

[Obscure_Observer]

@S2Killinit

"Class action law suit"

Great move!

Is there any way you can return your Series S and get your money back?

[Profchaos]

@sk2kill
You believed the trillion dollar company even they told you a far cheaper system was going to be just as capable as their premium system and never questioned it. That's exactly what I was saying you paid for half of a next gen system and got half a next gen system

[sparky77]

Surprised the parity clause even covered optional gameplay features, was kind of hoping for a delay since it would increase the chance of a Day 1 Game Pass release.

[Eonjay]

No it makes perfect sense because you want to sell the S. It's a much easier product for Microsoft to produce than the X and its a lot cheaper. However, this cost saving becomes a liability if people avoid it because they think they are restricted to inferior gaming experiences... after all, if you buy it and play it on the S you are paying the same amount as if you bought it on the X but you are getting less game.

I would never recommend the S model to anyone. Knowing what we all know now, would you?

[raWfodog]

At one time I was even considering getting an S back when MS bought Zenimax and it was suggested that all future Bethesda games would be Xbox exclusive. Not anymore though. I'd rather pay a little more for the X than have to deal with the S' problems.

[wiz7191]

@Eonjay I would still recommend it for children .. I would never spend $499 on a console for a child , even $399 is kinda a lot .. I definitely wouldn’t recommend it to my friend’s though

[slayernz]

gonna be interesting to see how many on xbox actually buy it - all my friends are so stuck on their gamepass way of life now they dont buy games and simply say they'll wait till it comes on gamepass......and another classic example from your comment sparky....so focused on a gamepass release, how about you just get your wallet out and support the game!!!!!!

[Profchaos]

Extremely common belief is that all games eventually end up there and I've been guilty of holding out on a 7/10 because I believed it wasn't good enough to sell on its own and would end up on PS plus or gamepass eventually

But yeah it's Microsoft's own admission their gamers don't buy many games

[wiz7191]

@Slayernz I have gamepass and still buy games .. waiting on GP you might be waiting a long time , plus I have friends who aren’t even subscribed

[Eonjay]

I have to agree with the gamepass mentality. My brother in-law will not buy games anymore because of GamePass.

[theindiearmy]

Doubtful of any chance of this coming to Game Pass. Neither Divinity game has been on Game Pass thus far.

[S2Killinit]

@sparky
Its not like it matches the other xbox on graphics or performance, so what else is left but “optional gameplay features”?

[Flakegriffin]

😂

[Jin_Sakai]

The solution was dropping split screen co-op on Series S. Guess they couldn’t make it work even with help. Regardless, they made the right move.

[Outside_ofthe_Box]

This shows that Series S can/will hold this gen back a bit. People were saying keeping games cross gen with the Xbox One/PS4 being the base consoles were the reason, but as games get more demanding, I wouldn't be surprised if Phil has to make more exceptions like this in the future.

[Jin_Sakai]

All you have to do is adjust the sliders. We all know this because that’s what Xbox fans told us.

[Popsicle]

Whole argument of sliders and elevators never made sense. Why not just release next gen games on my NES, SNES, and N64. All it is sliders and elevators after all.

[Profchaos]

@popsicle I mean there's a ton of fan made demakes for those systems one of my favourites is Mario Odyssey for the nes

[victorMaje]

The S is a gen-bridge console that was marketed as current-gen.
MS smoke & mirrors…

[badz149]

according to MS, the SS is their current gen console and the SX is the mid-gen upgrade

[Obscure_Observer]

"This shows that Series S can/will hold this gen back a bit."

How exactly the SS will hold back anything if there´s NO PARITY clauses in place?

[Christopher]

You should read his full comment first. "I wouldn't be surprised if Phil has to make more exceptions like this in the future."

He answered you before you even had to ask. Let alone one game not having parity doesn't mean others won't have to abide by it.

[Obscure_Observer]

@Christopher

"You should read his full comment first."

I did.

"He answered you before you even had to ask. Let alone one game not having parity doesn't mean others won't have to abide by it."

24 hours ago Phil said something about "learning from mistakes" regarding BG3, people laughed and called him a liar.

Now parity for BG3's co-op between Series X and S dropped.

I mean, if he really learned something from mistakes, specifically on this case, he´ll never enforce parity over developers again if such clauses have the potential to harm games development, be that for first, second or third party games.

[Seraphim]

@Obscure - that's just it, he can claim he learns from his mistakes yet it's more likely than not he repeats this very mistake, and has to make a concession for a future game. Learning from a mistake means remembering that mistake, and I don't think Phil has the capability or desire to do. It's merely PR speak for the present, not the future.

[Obscure_Observer]

@Seraphim

"Learning from a mistake means remembering that mistake, and I don't think Phil has the capability or desire to do. It's merely PR speak for the present, not the future."

I remember when Phil ditched the Kinect so developers could have access to more resources from Xbox One´s GPU.

"The June SDK released to developers gives them access to additional GPU resources previously reserved for Kinect and system functions. Accessing the additional GPU resources is done by the developer, and how developers choose to access the extra GPU performance for their games is up to them."

https://www.eurogamer.net/x...

So yeah, I believe him when he says "learn from mistakes" and will do what he can to help developers to do their work as smooth as possible. Dropping the BG3´s co-op parity is just proof of his words.

[maniacmayhem]

@Christopher

He actually didn't answer it. Maybe you should read what Obscure is actually asking because I asked it to.

How is the S holding back this gen "a bit" when the featur still appears on the PS5 and Series X?

[Christopher]

Wow, maniacmayhem, are you trying to gaslight me? That isn't at all what was originally asked. Did you forget that the question revolves entirely around parity? Outside literally stressed handling of parity issues and Obscure asked how there would be issues if there wasn't parity to hold it back.

[ChasterMies]

This opens the floodgates for other publishers to drop features for Series S. And if third party publishers can get away with it, all those Microsoft studios can. Back when Microsoft announces Series S, I said it was a bad investment. I foresaw game releases that are canceled on Series S or neutered for Series S. Now you can see it for yourself.

[maniacmayhem]

So dropping a feature for S, but still having it for PS5 and Series X shows that the S is holding the gen back a bit? Could you explain that a bit more and make it make sense?

While your at it care to share which games did the series S hold back?

[Outside_ofthe_Box]

It's the fact that they had to drop it. We only know about this instance because it was made public.They could have decided to internally scrap split screen across all platforms altogether and released the PS5 and Xbox versions at the same time and we'd never know. They instead went with dropping it with Phil's approval, but this is the first of anything like this happening. If Phil continues to make exceptions then sure nothing in theory would be held back, but this instance is proof that the S is not on par with the X and PS5 and we'll never know what features/ideas may be scrapped as a result of the S unless it's made public.

[maniacmayhem]

You didn't answer my question and you made even less sense than before, how is the S holding back next gen?

*It's the fact that they had to drop it*

And? The game was going to release on PS5 and it has already released on PC, despite the issue with the S. So how was the S going to be responsible for holding back this gen "a bit" or a "fact" when it never has in the first place?

*instance is proof that the S is not on par with the X and PS5*

Was it supposed to be? When was this stated? A 1080p budget console with less ram was supposed to be on par with the X or PS5, please tell me you're kidding.

If the compromise is getting rid of split screen (which is hardly a requested next gen feature) then I say the S is still doing its job by still playing current gen games.

There hasn't been one game that couldn't be made because of the S, so far, so claiming the S will hold this gen back is silly, especially when you can't name one game.

[Outside_ofthe_Box]

"You didn't answer my question"

Yes I did. This is article literally shows this. The Xbox release was delayed because of the S no? And is only releasing because Phil gave the the thumbs up to cut a feature which means either Phil will have to continue doing so in the future or features will get cut across the board moving forward as games get even more demanding than this gen. Remember we only knew about this issue because it was made public. Not every dev is going express issues publicly, but because it was expressed here we now know the S can infact pose issues it's no longer speculative.

"And? The game was going to release on PS5 and it has already released on PC, despite the issue with the S"

I'm talking about the bigger picture here. You're looking at it from only this game's perspective. Do you think every developer is going to skip Xbox or delay release if they are struggling with something on the S?

"Was it supposed to be? When was this stated?"

You know what I mean. The only difference between the S and the other consoles was suppose to be graphical features like resolution, lighting, frames, etc. Not actual content and features like split screen.

"There hasn't been one game that couldn't be made because of the S, so far, so claiming the S will hold this gen back is silly, especially when you can't name one game."

I never said couldn't be made, I said hold back as in not taking full advantage of the consoles unless Phil continues to make exceptions. Sure split screen ain't a big deal but it was still something that caused an unwanted delay and the S was the reason for it. If you think all is resolved and that there won't be any issues going forward as games get more demanding then I don't know what to say to you.

[maniacmayhem]

Seriously, you did not. A feature from a game not releasing on ONE system does not constitute HOLDING A GEN BACK even "a bit" as you originally stated.

One feature like split screen is not a cross gen feature only found in Baldurs Gate 3, the Series S has games that also does split screen, if I'm not mistaken, Diablo 4 is one of them. So again, how is the S holding a gen back if those games are still releasing even if they skip the S, which so far no game has.

*I'm talking about the bigger picture here*

No you're not, you are dealing with hypotheticals, I'm dealing with facts. One feature removed from one budget console does not mean that console is holding back a gen. If you can provide proof that other games are not being developed across all platforms with this gen in mind because of the S then you would have a point. But as of now your whole argument consists of "it might","we don't know" and "could be".

*hold back as in not taking full advantage of the consoles*

And I'm saying this is absolutely not true because you haven't provided one example and the fact that the game has not been compromised for the PS5, PC and Series X, so again if exceptions are made for S but not for the X and definitely won't hinder PC or PS5, then how in the hell will the S hold back a gen?

The problem is a lot of people on this site parrot anti Xbox rhetoric without fully thinking it through, and then when they actually have to explain it you'll start to see their explanation has zero to do with their original statement.

[Outside_ofthe_Box]

The issue with you is that you're a blind fan. No shit that split screen can be done on the S. Just as 4k can be done on the S. Just depends on the complexity/ how demanding the game is.

It's a fact that Baldur's Gate 3 struggled with split screen on the S there by delaying the X as a result. Doesn't matter if other games can do it. Other games run 60fps on the X why not Starfield? This isn't hypothetical or speculation anymore. Why couldn't the devs get split screen working on the S? Because the S doesn't have the overhead room to do so compared to the X and PS5 that's a fact. Any future game that's demanding and/or ambitious will have to keep in mind that the S may provide a set back. That is a reasonable assumption not anti Xbox rhetoric whether you like it or not. If not for Phil allowing the devs to cut that feature who knows if the game would have ever came to Xbox. Is it reasonable to assume that Phil will continue to make exceptions sure, I stated as such in my original comment. But that basically means the S is no different than then a last gen console when it comes to cross gen games where there may be certain features that are "next gen only" that aren't featured on the last gen version. And guess what people say about cross gen games? By your logic they aren't holding anything back so why drop support?

It's definitely not anti Xbox or unreasonable to assume that devs might opt to scrap certain things for consistency across platforms. They've done so in past if current consoles aren't powerful enough to handle certain things, so why not if the S can't handle it especially if said feature isn't critical or a big deal or a "core" part of the game? Not like we would ever find out unless someone does so in an interview stating as such.

I already know what you're reply is going to be. So I'm done here. Something about you don't have proof/facts, just more hypotheticals, and anti Xbox talk, etc, etc. Even though everything I've said is based on the facts we have right here especially with Phil having to allow an exception to their own policies in order for a game to release on their own platform due to having an underpowered console.

[maniacmayhem]

*The issue with you is that you're a blind fan.*

Coming from someone who was so hurt that MS bought Activision that he had to go on a satirical rant in previous FDA lost articles. That is too funny.

*Even though everything I've said is based on the facts*

So based on facts right? Then name ONE game that was held back this gen because of the S. This is what you said yourself and yet you haven't said not one game! You're the only fanboy here unable to provide one factual statement to backup your stupid claim. All you do is dance around the actual topic, a topic you first brought to the table.

*Phil having to allow an exception to their own policies in order for a game to release on their own platform due to having an underpowered console.*

This is so dumb, absolutely no one is debating this. NO ONE. My question is how is the S holding back this gen, like you said? You can't answer this, because it's stupid Sony fanboy rhetoric instead you have to dance around the subject by talking about everything else but what is actually the point.

The latest FF dips to 720 and runs at 30fps and struggles in most areas and sacrifices in gameplay in certain areas and must make compromises in both performance modes it offers. Why doesn't FF run at 4k 60fps throughout the whole game? Why does it need two performance modes? Did the Series S hold that game back also?

Again, you're while argument isn't based on what you stated in your original post. And I left how many replies asking which game did the S hold back this gen? You couldn't answer not one.

So it's good you're done here, maybe think about what you post before you parrot stupid statements like *Series S can/will hold this gen back a bit* , Especially considering that BG 3 made absolutely no compromises for the PC, PS5 or Xbox Series X

If a game has to be cut back for the S only, that doesn't and won't mean it will hold back the other consoles. Simple logic for anyone that isn't a Sony fanboy.

[Outside_ofthe_Box]

Exact response I expected. Already addressed everything you stated. You're just saying the same thing over and over.

Glad that my "satirical rants" got under skin though. Gaming was going through the dark ages until MS saved us with that Acti purchase!

FF16 should have released on the PS4 too then I guess...

[maniacmayhem]

So as usual you have nothing. I'll make it even simpler for you so that even a child will understand.

You said,

*This shows that Series S can/will hold this gen back a bit*

Which game this GEN was held back? Plain and simple.

HINT: when you say GEN, that encompasses ALL current consoles and PC. So which game proves your statement true? Name just one game.

Got under my skin? Lmao, naw son I enjoyed your mental breakdown in multiple articles

[CrashMania]

Dropping the parity clause here is the right move all in all I think.

[Popsicle]

As one of apparently very few Series X owners I agree, but if I were one of numerous S owners, I would be disappointed and may claim false advertisement. Especially as the gap continues to widen as current gen matures.

[franwex]

No you wouldn’t have. The series s owner does not think like you. They are more casual.

[Popsicle]

I fully agree that the install base for the Series S consists of more casual gamers. However, there was a time in my life when I was a hardcore gamer and I may have considered the Series S only because a Series X wouldn’t have fit in the budget. For gamers who purchased the Series S due to budget constraints and the promise of parity, I suspect this will become frustrating over time when dropping more than just split screen is necessary. IMHO

[franwex]

I’m sorry. But why would you have bought an S as a hardcore gamer? Why just not get a PS5 digital with a larger SSD and better performance for only $100 more?

There’s nothing wrong with the S, it’s actually great-for casual gaming. I’m not you, so I cannot say how you would spend you money. I just find it bizarre that a hardcore gamer would buy a series s.

Either way I’m glad the parity is out, and still doubt the average S player actually will notice.

[niiopi]

The fact of the matter is, in legal terms, the game on the S and the game on the X is NOT the same. The features offered are different now, and it was advertised that it would be the same.

If the Xbox S is mainly for casual gamers and the S makes up the majority of MS current gen console sales then it stands to reason that the majority of Xbox gamers are casual gamers.... good luck trying to sell games to that group of consumers.

[thesoftware730]

This is great news.

[KillaJamm]

Down voted because a game is coming to more people? I don't get this site man.

[thesoftware730]

Yes, but not surprising.

Look below at jznrpg, he does not like Xbox, yet he finds his way into everything single thing concerning Xbox lol.

[jznrpg]

That’s lame for the Series S people. They should have waited. They said you can play the same games on both but now they have another asterisk for a game. 60fps sticker coming later for Redfall. Series S same game but less features

[darthv72]

you'd be surprised how many DONT use split screen for this game. it was optional, not a requirement. This isnt "It Takes Two" which does require split screen (and the S fully supports).

[Popsicle]

Enough with the spin Darth. The Series S was marketed as a 1440p @60 fps machine that plays fully functional next gen games. There was never a mention of leaving features out of games on the S. Microsoft said that the differences would be made up with sliders and elevators. The games were promised to have parity with respect to features.

I am happy they dropped parity, but this is a bad look for Microsoft no matter how you try to spin it.

[darthv72]

^^parity with core game features...

split screen is not a core game feature for THIS game. For a game like It Takes Two, it IS.

[Popsicle]

You are doubling down on a poor argument. You are saying that split screen is not a “core feature” because it is not important to you. However, split screen is a core feature for some gamers. Especially in households where the budget console was the only affordable “next gen” option.

Ultimately you are moving the goal post. Microsoft stated feature parity. They never stated “core feature parity” because that is highly subjective and is based on what is important to the end user.

[Outside_ofthe_Box]

"split screen is not a core game feature for THIS game. For a game like It Takes Two, it IS."

Darth... Are you saying that for example if a developer were to omit let's say a New Game+ mode or a Photo mode for Series S but have it for the Series X, that would be okay because it's not a "core" feature?

[maniacmayhem]

@Outside and popsicle

He's saying that users who bought a BUDGET console shouldn't expect all the bells and whistles that it's high end counterpart has.

The fact that people are actually complaining about the S not having everything the X does knowing it's specs are less is the true hilarious part.

Split screen is an option, but it's not a necessity to play the game especially when online still exists.

It's just like backwards compatibility years back, when people complained it was a nice feature to have but not necessary.

[Outside_ofthe_Box]

@Maniac

I know what he's trying to say and actually agree split screen isn't a big deal. I'm pointing out that you can use that logic for other modes and it would be justified. In the end the S wasn't marketed in this way and MS shouldn't be let off the hook for it even if it is the right move.

[Tedakin]

I have a Series X. Why should I not get the game when it's ready cause the Series S can't handle split-screen. That's not an important feature. It has nothing to do with being able to play and enjoy the game. I bet 99% of Series S owners would rather have the game without splitscreen than not at all.

[franwex]

You’re correct.

Probably 99% of series s owners are not going to buy this game. They may play it if it’s on Game Pass.

[FatalityX77]

Good. That parity was really hurting developers. Still Make the games on series S, but allow cutbacks if needed. That's the risk when you buy an entry level system. It's expected. Or stream it like the upcoming Starfield option for series s. It's not a good feeling when you own a series x and know it's hindered by its little brother.

[Hofstaderman]

According to MS Series S is the main console. It also has a substantially higher adoptive rate than the series X so yeah, unfortunately get used to it, in fact we will all likely have to get to used to it with multi platform games.

[purple101]

Dat' 10gb of ram dough'

[Lightning77]

Found a solution? No the solution is to drop the S all together or release a stronger S version at least.

Meanwhile at Xbox. The S is a perfect console! Lmao bunch of clowns.

[badz149]

"let's double down on it and release the 1TB version of the Series S next"

[EasilyTheBest]

This Game looks great but I honestly can't understand why they couldn't get split screen to work on the Series S.
Obviously the resolution framerate or even less things onscreen would be needed but I'm sure it could of been done.
The game was probably not planned properly & would of taken a lot longer to get it to work on the Series S as it Obviously wasn't worked on throughout development.
You could get this game to work on a PS4 or Xbox One if you planned it properly from the beginning.
Microsoft can't really come out & say as much as they want the game on their consoles & don't want to cause a rift with the developer.

[Christopher]

1. It's 2-player split screen locally, running off one machine to do everything in a 3D world with detail.
2. The world areas are very large and players can move around in them freely. It's not restricted to characters on the same screen or to AI in one section of the game world at once.
3. Because of #2, tons of AI that can easily destroy your CPU and drag the game to a halt. Even on PC currently some people experience severe lag in Act 3 because of AI issues in combat. There is just so much AI options in the game (spells alone, let alone all the other tactical elements involved and the use of the environment) by that time that controlling 5+ enemies and how they will murderhobo your party can be taxing, and some battles can have up to 20 enemies at once if you play your cards right (wrong?).
4. They're an indie studio delivering a massive game with a shit ton happening behind the scenes and it's not going to be optimized like other games with much easier baselines.

[darthv72]

Larian decided to omit the option of local split screen for the steam deck. somehow the game knows what it is being run on and limits the options. I'd imagine that they do the same thing here. the game just knows the difference between S and X and locks out local split screen on the one but not the other. this was posed to Larian a while ago but they were insistent on trying to make it work on the S.

People (like Chris) think that Phil demands that everything be the same on both when that couldnt be further from the truth. The core game is the same on both. Other things like ray tracing and 60/120fps and even split screen are all options... not requirements.

[rippermcrip]

Yes, quite funny how Phil had a meeting with Larian and then soon after Larian announces that parity is dropped.

And you don't think that came from Phil? Riiiight.

Why are you even talking about ray tracing and FPS? Those are graphical options. Not comparable at all to a gameplay feature.

[darthv72]

^^that meeting probably went something like this...
Phil: you know, split screen is not a requirement to ship on xbox. So why are you trying so hard to make something work if it isnt to your liking?

Swen: We have an artistic vision that we did not want to compromise with an inferior split screen component.

Phil: then just drop it from the S like you did the steam deck. You certainly dont have a problem with that compromise and we dont have a problem with doing the same here.

Swen: okay then, its settled. We will lock local co-op to the X and give S the same online options and other improvements the X has.

Phil: excellent. Have you seen what we've been doing with Starfield? Come... lets go take a look.

[rippermcrip]

So your argument is that Phil didn't drop the clause, but instead told them to drop their artistic vision... because it was harming Microsoft sales?

You think that is better? Wow.

[niiopi]

@darthv72

The fact you have the audacity to act like you were in the room and know what "probably" happened during a corporate conversation at a level which you and I would probably NEVER be in the room for, and you spew it out as if its "probable fact" is truly astounding. People like you should be studied, cause that's just.. wild.

[Outside_ofthe_Box]

So are you saying that the developers are lying?

[franwex]

Probably game engine was designed with more power in mind.

[Soulsborne]

Drop the SS next so we can finally get into this gen without being held back.

[NotoriousWhiz]

Can't happen unless Microsoft provides free Series X upgrades for all S owners. There are ~20ish million Series consoles currently sold. More than half are guaranteed to be Series S (probably around 60%). Dropping the S drops the Xbox userbase to around 10 million and you can bet the 10+ million that got dropped won't be coming back to xbox.

[MrPerfect813]

You cant have Starfield coming out as an Xbox Exclusive on September 6 but basically give PS5 an "exclusive" on the same day because you want to haggle about split screen on the Series S....

[CrimsonWing69]

Y'know it's an issue when Microsoft "lessens" the parity clause.

Look, if you want to do a downgraded machine, that's fine, but don't make a parity clause. Let the consumer know that they're getting what they pay for and let the X have games that can't run on the S. If devs are saying the S is restricting game design and they're running into issues all because of the S then let them drop the S.

I don't want to constantly hear how the S is holding next-gen back.

If you can't live with that then don't give people this option.

[Brazz]

Series S is a mistake. It's too weak and not popular enough, games will run like shit soon on MS little machine.

[Blad3runner00]

What a mess with this 'parity clause'
How can you expect parity between two systems, when one of them is arguably last generation console hardware in a lot of respects, while at the same time, because of this, you are 'limiting' the Series X version because of this.

[TheColbertinator]

That's good for Xbox but parity holds back the X

[PunksOnN4G]

This also means Xbox own engineers that were sent could not ge tit done either and xbox own 1st party cant either LOL.. Man oh man this consoel is aging like wine...

[shadowT]

So even Xbox's best engineers are not able to fix the issues of Xbox Series S.

[RupeeHoarder]

Hope the 70% of Xbox owners (who are Series S owners) don’t blindly lay down for this. The 1440p machine was falsely advertised and a complete sham. This is only going to get worse as we start seeing more UE5 games and other more advanced engines the second half of this generation. Going to be a grueling 3+ years.

[raWfodog]

Funny that the 'solution' they found is what many gamers have been saying from the start. Drop the split-screen from Series S and keep it on Series X. Problem solved.

[Wrex369]

Considering this is the only compromise they've had to do in 3 years this is nice lol good to see it releasing the same year as the other platforms, anyone mad at that is just being funny.

[nibblo]

I doubt there will be many Xbox Series S owners raging at the heavens about this call.

[Tedakin]

Literally no one cares.

[DaleCooper]

Good idea. You can't miss out on your platform having what could be GOTY because of a likely little used feature - as cool as that feature may be.

[StarkR3ality]

Should of been this way since day one, however Xbox know now other devs having issues with the S will now ask for the same treatment. I expect games will now be optimised more for the X and then use the S as an after thought, stripping features etc.

Dangerous ground they're walking on, as I think it'll lead to Series X only games and using the whole Xcloud shit to stream games to the S, I think that's what they will do personally. Whether that is the best solution Idk, but I see them moving that way and that's why they are investing so much into cloud.

[FPS_D3TH]

Xbox series S or at a very minimum, forcing parity, was and will always be a mistake. Gimped console holding back a generation of games.

[franwex]

Well there it is.

“But they won’t, Wah, Wah, Wah.”

I’ll wait for my cookie.

[Destiny1080]

the geniuses finally figured it out, after that minecraft debacle, after the halo embarrassment, the 30fps redfall, the penny is starting to drop

[Godmars290]

So MS blinked, as usual.

[gold_drake]

its speaks volumes that they had to drop a gameplay feature for the s just so they can release it sooner.

[Ashunderfire86]

Yeahhhh now we all get to see the Bear 🐻 like the PC and PS5 gamers together! We even get to see what that squirrel 🐿️ sees.

[Tedakin]

Good. A feature hardly anyone uses on one console shouldn't hold back and entire game for everyone.

[shinoff2183]

Good for Xbox fans and good for larian. Good news

[goddi]

The question is will Series S owner pay the same as Series X owner for that game 👀

[blacktiger]

Good question

[Abear21]

Smart move on them to get this game out the door. This is the smoking gun that S is holding devs back

[blacktiger]

Now there is a reason not to own series S. You won't get the same next Gen game

[Fonsecap]

The same will happen with Forza, they're struggling with the same feature, split screen, so Forza on the S may not have split screen racing...

https://www.gamespot.com/ar...

[MrNinosan]

Perfect, let's see how many copies this amazing game can move on Xbox without GamePass.
My guess is, not so many, even thou it's the highest reviewed game of the year.

[hard joe]

it can barely run on mid end gaming laptop

[DazaMc]

What's next? Missing levels. I feel sorry for anyone who bought that potato, they should have just released the Series X without a disc drive.

[Sharterias]

Thank God.

I think after Phil's comment on Gamescon, his PR people took one look at all social media and saw the shitstorm that got stirred up and warned him that Xbox gamers were not okay with having to indefinitely wait for splitscreen to work on Series S before the game can launch on Series X.

I hated that decision but glad he listened to feedback from the community and reversed course.

Another theory is that Larian straight up said that they weren't willing to make the sacrifices to textures, framerate, and resolution in order to get the game to run splitscreen Series S. They probably gave Xbox an ultimatum and said "Either drop split screen on Series S or we skip Xbox all together".

After hearing this, Phil probably rolled a blunt, took a massive rip, played some Starfield to relax and ponder the situation, realized that Baldur's Gate 3 would not be the last game be in this kind of situation, and then made the right call.

Series S owners...I'm sorry. I'd try to sell that thing and upgrade if I were you, or try to get into xcloud. Sadly, it will never be able to be a serious console with all of the same features as Series X, even though it was marketed that way.

I feel bad...but Series S owners were honestly sacrificed for the greater good of not just Xbox, but the whole industry. Many devs probably felt hamstrung by the Series S and had to sacrifice scope and ambition on ps5 and Series X to make sure it runs on the budget console.

We can expect more ambitious games. Yippee!