Register a SA Forums Account here!
JOINING THE SA FORUMS WILL REMOVE THIS BIG AD, THE ANNOYING UNDERLINED ADS, AND STUPID INTERSTITIAL ADS!!!

You can: log in, read the tech support FAQ, or request your lost password. This dumb message (and those ads) will appear on every screen until you register! Get rid of this crap by registering your own SA Forums Account and joining roughly 150,000 Goons, for the one-time price of $9.95! We charge money because it costs us $3,400 per month for bandwidth bills alone, and since we don't believe in shoving popup ads to our registered users, we try to make the money back through forum registrations.
 
  • Post
  • Reply
Quantum of Phallus
Dec 27, 2010




Lammasu posted:

No. Skyrim is the 19th highest selling video game of all time. I was making fun of they guy that said they aren't going to sell well anymore.

Right right

Adbot
ADBOT LOVES YOU

Bedlam
Feb 15, 2008

Angry thoughts



Despite fallout 76, Elder Scrolls Online, Silly bethesda cardgames or whatever the internet would lose itself with hype if Elder Scrolls 6 was announced. Bethesda is absolutely a big name and it's weird to think their games being xbone exclusive wouldn't move the needle.

Intel&Sebastian
Oct 20, 2002

colonel...
i'm trying to sneak around
but i'm dummy thicc
and the clap of my ass cheeks
keeps alerting the guards!


ESO is doing real good last I heard

76 though lmfao. That was probably a harsh enough failure to make them course correct for whatever 5 is gonna be so maybe it'll all be ok.

LIVE AMMO COSPLAY
Feb 3, 2006



Becoming a backwards compatible game pass title may stunt Skyrim's future sales.

morallyobjected
Nov 3, 2012


wouldn't it be easier to just develop for the higher selling systems than assume that one publisher is going to sell enough systems to make up for the money you're leaving on the table?

American McGay
Feb 28, 2010



No.

hambeet
Sep 13, 2002



Looking at top games by sales, the vast majority in the top 20 are multi platforms releases and some Nintendo. In the top 50 thereís only one Xbox exclusive (Kinect adventures lol) and one PS (the last of us).

Elder Scrolls 5 will be popular, but if limited to Xbox and PC only?

Shirkelton
Apr 6, 2009

I'm not loyal to anything, General... except the dream.


Lammasu posted:

No. Skyrim is the 19th highest selling video game of all time. I was making fun of they guy that said they aren't going to sell well anymore.

I didn't say they weren't going to 'sell well', but they're not going to sell the same numbers when they're no longer releasing on the biggest platform and being available on Gamepass day one.

History Comes Inside!
Nov 20, 2004






Just lol if you play any Bethesda RPG on a console

Rad Valtar
May 31, 2011

CONGRESS SHALL MAKE NO LAW RESPECTING AN ESTABLISHMENT OF RELIGION, OR PROHIBITING THE FREE EXERCISE THEREOF; OR ABRIDGING THE FREEDOM OF SPEECH, OR OF THE PRESS; OR THE RIGHT OF THE PEOPLE PEACEABLY TO ASSEMBLE, AND TO PETITION THE GOVERNMENT FOR A REDRESS OF GRIEVANCES.


History Comes Inside! posted:

Just lol if you play any Bethesda RPG

morallyobjected
Nov 3, 2012


hambeet posted:

Looking at top games by sales, the vast majority in the top 20 are multi platforms releases and some Nintendo. In the top 50 thereís only one Xbox exclusive (Kinect adventures lol) and one PS (the last of us).

Elder Scrolls 5 will be popular, but if limited to Xbox and PC only?

the Kinect one has gotta be a pack-in, right?

univbee
Jun 3, 2004





morallyobjected posted:

the Kinect one has gotta be a pack-in, right?

Yeah, Kinect Adventures was a pack-in with standalone Kinects and I think every console bundle that came with one.

Most of the top bestselling games got that way from being a console pack-in (e.g. Wii Sports, SMB1, Tetris).


TES6, exclusive or not, will definitely be a pack-in with whatever console Microsoft is headlining at the time.

I wonder what they'll do about TES6 in East Asian territories if Xbox doesn't get more of a foothold there and they're trying to keep it off PlayStation. Will they just skip those regions entirely (no Korean/Chinese/Japanese localization)?

Real hurthling!
Sep 11, 2001






Es6 is a next next gen game

hambeet
Sep 13, 2002



actually i think they said they wont start TE6 until Starfield is done.

dunno if that'll change with the change in ownership? Microsoft are pretty hands off aren't they?

hanyolo
Jul 18, 2013
I am an employee of the Microsoft Gaming Division and they pay me to defend the Xbox One on the Something Awful Forums

People in east asia don't own PCs?

Real hurthling!
Sep 11, 2001






They use pcs at cafes

hambeet posted:

actually i think they said they wont start TE6 until Starfield is done.

dunno if that'll change with the change in ownership? Microsoft are pretty hands off aren't they?

Its going to be so far in the future idk

hambeet
Sep 13, 2002



just re-release skyrim with ray tracing for xbox and pc only. people will buy it.

hambeet
Sep 13, 2002



or put it out on ps5 too, but have a 'It plays better on an X-BOX' splash screen every time they load the game.

univbee
Jun 3, 2004





hanyolo posted:

People in east asia don't own PCs?

For gaming it's a lot more limited than console. I know off-hand there are a bunch of games which are technically multiplat, but you can only get them in Japanese on PlayStation. This was a thing with Blizzard Activision games for a while, for example (e.g. you can't play Diablo III in Japanese on PC or Xbox, only on PS3 or PS4).

But Starfield is going to have to come first, TES6 is far enough in the future that it could legitimately be a game for the following gen, as alluded to earlier.

Akuma
Sep 11, 2001




Bedlam posted:

the internet would lose itself with hype if Elder Scrolls 6 was announced.
It was announced 2 years ago.

Quantum of Phallus
Dec 27, 2010




I like how everyone assumes Starfield is still in development

Sioux
May 30, 2006

some ghoulish parody of humanity

So we get one HDMI 2.1 cable with the console. Just connecting it to the audio receiver will probably not do anything nextgenny. Do I need to buy a second cable to put between the receiver and the TV or can I only connect the console directly to the TV? Then how do I get sound to my surround set?

hambeet
Sep 13, 2002



Starcitizenfield

Barudak
May 7, 2007



Quantum of Phallus posted:

I like how everyone assumes Starfield is still in development

Sony was apparently trying to negotiate timed exclusivity when Microsoft bought them so it exists in some form.

Quantum of Phallus
Dec 27, 2010




Sioux posted:

Then how do I get sound to my surround set?

Does your tv have a optical out?

TheScott2K
Oct 26, 2003

I'm just saying, there's a nonzero chance Trump has a really toad penis.

The XSX has optical out, send that to the receiver.

Zerot
Aug 18, 2006


TheScott2K posted:

The XSX has optical out, send that to the receiver.

The Series X does not have optical out.

irpoweroutlet
Aug 23, 2005
It's 'Lectric!

Sioux posted:

So we get one HDMI 2.1 cable with the console. Just connecting it to the audio receiver will probably not do anything nextgenny. Do I need to buy a second cable to put between the receiver and the TV or can I only connect the console directly to the TV? Then how do I get sound to my surround set?

I think it really depends on how new your tv and receiver are. If you have an older receiver and a 4K tv, you probably want to run hdmi from the Xbox to the tv, and then run a cable from the optical out on your tv to your receiver.

If you have an hdmi 2.1 receiver, you can probably get HDMI Arc/eArc to work. Hereís some info on it:

https://www.lifewire.com/audio-return-channel-1846845

Somebody correct me if Iím wrong here, I havenít really dealt with much in the way of modern surround systems.

ColdPie
Jun 9, 2006



Hair Elf

irpoweroutlet posted:

I think it really depends on how new your tv and receiver are. If you have an older receiver and a 4K tv, you probably want to run hdmi from the Xbox to the tv, and then run a cable from the optical out on your tv to your receiver.

If you have an hdmi 2.1 receiver, you can probably get HDMI Arc/eArc to work. Hereís some info on it:

https://www.lifewire.com/audio-return-channel-1846845

Somebody correct me if Iím wrong here, I havenít really dealt with much in the way of modern surround systems.

You're right, except ARC has been around for a long while, so there's pretty good odds the receiver will support it even if it doesn't support latest HDMI specs. That would let you avoid needing an optical cable.

Or buy a new receiver so you don't need to change inputs on the TV

univbee
Jun 3, 2004





https://twitter.com/HardDriveMag/st...6907683842?s=20

TheScott2K
Oct 26, 2003

I'm just saying, there's a nonzero chance Trump has a really toad penis.

Zerot posted:

The Series X does not have optical out.

Wait what

Edit: oh for fucks sake

TheScott2K fucked around with this message at 15:23 on Oct 18, 2020

Real hurthling!
Sep 11, 2001






Console to tv via hdmi
Tv to soundbar via optical

Ruffian Price
Sep 17, 2016



Always go source->receiver->display if you can (and want stable latencies), ARC is unreliable.

Real hurthling!
Sep 11, 2001






I mean for people that have to use optical with their speaker setup

American McGay
Feb 28, 2010



Ruffian Price posted:

Always go source->receiver->display if you can (and want stable latencies), ARC is unreliable.
Why would routing the video signal through the receiver and then out to your TV be better for latency than plugging it directly into your TV?

Unless you need a lot of individual HDMI inputs that modern TVs don't have (>4) you should be running the HDMI into the TV and then optical out from the TV to the receiver.

This will also allow you to set different picture profiles for each of the HDMI inputs.

Arcsech
Aug 5, 2008


American McGay posted:

Why would routing the video signal through the receiver and then out to your TV be better for latency than plugging it directly into your TV?

Unless you need a lot of individual HDMI inputs that modern TVs don't have (>4) you should be running the HDMI into the TV and then optical out from the TV to the receiver.

This will also allow you to set different picture profiles for each of the HDMI inputs.

I had issues with the audio being higher latency than the video using ARC/optical, by a noticeable amount. The audio was behind the displayed video by a good .5s or so. I managed to fix it by loving around with the audio settings on the TV enough, but I still donít entirely understand what fixed it.

E: only the Xbox had this problem, for whatever reason. PS4 was fine.

acksplode
May 17, 2004





I've been plugging all my media sources into a receiver for years and haven't had any latency problems, and I play lots of action games and the occasional rhythm game. I'm also trying ARC out for the first time since I don't have a HDMI 2.1 compatible receiver, and I haven't noticed any latency while mousing around a Windows desktop and playing videos. I'd guess any problems would come down to something specific to your TV or receiver or source, rather than something inherent to either approach.

Twerk from Home
Jan 17, 2009

This avatar brought to you by the 'save our dead gay forums' foundation.


I'm going to throw my own lovely situation on this pile:

My TV only has 1 single HDMI port that can do ARC, and it's also the only port that can accept HDR content. The 4 other ports are all HDMI 2.0 and can do 4K, but not HDR or ARC.

Maybe it's finally time for me to upgrade receivers. My receiver is HDMI 1.4a.

Cojawfee
May 31, 2006
I think the US is dumb for not using Celsius

Is the point of ARC just to use an HDMI cable as an audio cable? I've noticed that some receivers and soundbars will have a pass through so you can go from a device, through the receiver to the TV and then also send audio back to the soundbar from other devices on the TV. But anything affordable only has on HDMI port for ARC so you have to waste on HDMI port on the TV to use as just an audio cable. It seems like an interesting concept that device manufacturers aren't sure how to use.

Adbot
ADBOT LOVES YOU

Twerk from Home
Jan 17, 2009

This avatar brought to you by the 'save our dead gay forums' foundation.


Cojawfee posted:

Is the point of ARC just to use an HDMI cable as an audio cable? I've noticed that some receivers and soundbars will have a pass through so you can go from a device, through the receiver to the TV and then also send audio back to the soundbar from other devices on the TV. But anything affordable only has on HDMI port for ARC so you have to waste on HDMI port on the TV to use as just an audio cable. It seems like an interesting concept that device manufacturers aren't sure how to use.

HDMI can carry more formats and higher audio quality than optical. If youíve actually got 7.1 or want uncompressed audio, optical canít do it.

Frequently apps on the TV are the A/V source now, and you have to get the audio back to the receiver or soundbar somehow.

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
  • Post
  • Reply