• Hey, guest user. Hope you're enjoying NeoGAF! Have you considered registering for an account? Come join us and add your take to the daily discourse.

Wukong director on the delay of Xbox port directly for the first time: need couple of years optimization experience to handle the shared 10 GB RAM

LectureMaster

Gold Member
But our omniscient journo king Taul Passi said it was due to Sony exclusive deal


Clown Clowning Around GIF by Sarah Squirm
 
If that came directly from MS' mouth it would be a form of libel. Microsoft knows the legalities of lying like this so it's highly unlikely that Microsoft lied.

Both can be true though. They can have a deal with Playstation and at the same time not have the experience to optimize for Series S.
It’s not libel at all or even close to it. They arent mentioning any names or accusing anyone of anything. They left it very vague like this on purpose.
 
Last edited:
But Ms hinted Playstation paid for exclusivity…..

https://www.mensjournal.com/videogames/black-myth-wukong-sony-secret-exclusivity-deal-report
Following that, a Microsoft spokesperson suggested the existence of a secret exclusivity deal. "We can't comment on the deals made by our partners with other platform holders, but we remain focused on making Xbox the best platform for gamers, and great games are at the center of that," said Microsoft.

Reports from IGN and Digital Foundry suggest that Sony and Game Science have signed a private deal, though whether it's for timed exclusivity is unclear. Previously, conflicting reports suggested that Game Science did not release Wukong on Xbox due to technical issues, but that seems to be incorrect.

Your telling me those slimy tards at MS, a multi trillion dollar tech company didnt know about the memory issues, and instead tried insinuate that there might be an exclusive deal between PS and Xbox…
Yep. Xbox and their Green Army, along with incompetent gaming "journalism", have been an embarrassment to the discourse surrounding Xbox's strategy and constant missteps.
 

Topher

Identifies as young
Thats a given though, theyre not going to bad talk their own product

They really didn't have to say anything at all. They could have simply directed questions to Game Science.

If that came directly from MS' mouth it would be a form of libel. Microsoft knows the legalities of lying like this so it's highly unlikely that Microsoft lied.

Both can be true though. They can have a deal with Playstation and at the same time not have the experience to optimize for Series S.

Nah, that's not libel. "Partners" could be anyone and even if we can read between the lines that ain't going to fly in a court. And even then, I can't imagine what damages could be claimed.

If Game Science did not have the experience to get the game on Xbox then why would Sony even need a deal?
 

ManaByte

Member
Yep more blaming the devs and not the hardware that several devs warned before release would be an issue. That’s fine Xbox can keep blaming lazy devs while Sony continues to get goty nominee exclusives for free.
The game struggles to hit 60fps on the fucking Pro. They’re shit devs.

And it’s not UE5’s fault or China. Marvel Rivals runs on UE5, is from a Chinese dev, and runs amazing on the Pro.
 

SHA

Member
Phil is doing the lord job addressing lazy devs habits, we actually need to see a difference in the hardware we've invested, we don't want to see games in 2025 that looks the same if not worse than a 10 years old game. Phil is a gamer like us, he thinks like us.
 
Last edited:

Venom Snake

Member
BM:W is very demanding on consoles, PS5 and XSX are the absolute minimum to make the game playable without looking like a Switch port.

Even the pro version has its shortcomings, although not as big as some people try to present in this thread ;)
What is most noticeable are not performance drops, but textures loading issues on some objects or low-quality textures right next to high-quality ones.

This game definitely needed more time in the oven. Time, that he developer wasted trying to adapt the code to XSS shortcomings, because the console that was supposed to be used for CoD and FIFA must, as a matter of parity, struggle with heavy UE5 titles like this one.

Maybe instead of bullshiting people about temporary exclusive deals, these shills should start making the community aware that their 4TF toy shouldn't be a reason to suspend the game release on XSX, because then everyone will lose.

People here will spin this into absurdity, blaming the developer, the game, competing platforms, anything other than Microsoft's idiotic decisions.
 
Last edited:

Kokoloko85

Member
But our omniscient journo king Taul Passi said it was due to Sony exclusive deal


Clown Clowning Around GIF by Sarah Squirm
Dont forget MS themselves
https://www.mensjournal.com/videogames/black-myth-wukong-sony-secret-exclusivity-deal-report

Following that, a Microsoft spokesperson suggested the existence of a secret exclusivity deal. "We can't comment on the deals made by our partners with other platform holders, but we remain focused on making Xbox the best platform for gamers, and great games are at the center of that," said Microsoft.

And of course IGN lol.
Reports from IGN and Digital Foundry suggest that Sony and Game Science have signed a private deal, though whether it's for timed exclusivity is unclear. Previously, conflicting reports suggested that Game Science did not release Wukong on Xbox due to technical issues, but that seems to be incorrect.

Why is it always MS with these confusions lol…
 
Last edited:

Bartski

Gold Member
I'm sure these guys can afford to make some UE5 hires now, best of luck I beat the game on the Pro last weekend and it still ran like trash.
 

Wolzard

Member
Could be the Series s And the X.
On the Series X, one segment is 10 GB running at 560 GB/s, primarily used for the graphics system, and the other is 6 GB running at 336 GB/s.
On the Series S, it's even worse. It's split into two parts: 8 GB running at 224 GB/s and 2 GB running at 56 GB/s.

So devs have to control what goes into what, or risk hitting the slower pool and performance staling.

It probably refers to the Series S, as it must be referring to the total amount of memory available.

And please stop repeating this nonsense, no developer needs to determine any of this. The faster bandwidth is primarily used by the GPU, it will hardly use 10 GB, as it needs to be shared with the CPU and for that, the slower speed is more than enough. Apart from the fact that all of this can be used in real time, data structures that require more speed go via the faster bus. The operating system's task scheduler controls this.

Yes, it can be really bad.
Remember the clusterfuck that was the memory split on the GTX 970?
It went so bad, that Nvidia never tried that strategy ever again.

The comparison is bad, because the difference between the memories was much greater, one had a 224-bit bus and the other a mere 32 bits, which resulted in a speed of 196 GB/s in the fastest and only 28 GB/s at the slowest. For most of the 970's life, this was never a problem because at its capacity, few games saturated the 4 GB of VRAM.

The XSX:

Memory Config:
10 GB for GPU memory - 320 bit @ 560GB/s
3.5 GB for System CPU - 192 bit @ 336GB/s
2.5 GB reserved by the OS - 192 bit @ 336GB/s
16 GB can be accessed by the GPU but limited to 192 bit after 10 GB has been used. But this will never happen, as memory will always be needed for the CPU.

For comparison purposes, DDR5 memories have an average bandwidth of 64 GB/s and is normally enough for CPUs on PCs.
 

Jaybe

Member
Why even bother with an Xbox port at this point, better to do a Switch 2 port instead if resources are limited. It is rumoured to have more ram than the XSS.
 

winjer

Gold Member
It probably refers to the Series S, as it must be referring to the total amount of memory available.

And please stop repeating this nonsense, no developer needs to determine any of this. The faster bandwidth is primarily used by the GPU, it will hardly use 10 GB, as it needs to be shared with the CPU and for that, the slower speed is more than enough. Apart from the fact that all of this can be used in real time, data structures that require more speed go via the faster bus. The operating system's task scheduler controls this.

He could be talking about any one of those consoles. It would be nice if he had developed it.

The OS can't predict what data the game will use next. It's the game that has to tell the OS, what data goes where.
Something like the dev defining the slower pool to be used as a streaming cache. Or use it as some sort of victim cache, but with memory.
And yes, the slower speed can affect performance, depending on what the game needs at the moment. Especially if it has to shuffle data between one pool and another.

The comparison is bad, because the difference between the memories was much greater, one had a 224-bit bus and the other a mere 32 bits, which resulted in a speed of 196 GB/s in the fastest and only 28 GB/s at the slowest. For most of the 970's life, this was never a problem because at its capacity, few games saturated the 4 GB of VRAM.

The GTX 970 was a good example of the issues that come with having 2 pools of vram , each with it's own speed.
It's a more extreme case than the Series S/X, but it still stands as a cautionary tale.

The XSX:

Memory Config:
10 GB for GPU memory - 320 bit @ 560GB/s
3.5 GB for System CPU - 192 bit @ 336GB/s
2.5 GB reserved by the OS - 192 bit @ 336GB/s
16 GB can be accessed by the GPU but limited to 192 bit after 10 GB has been used. But this will never happen, as memory will always be needed for the CPU.

For comparison purposes, DDR5 memories have an average bandwidth of 64 GB/s and is normally enough for CPUs on PCs.

A kit of DDR5, has much greater bandwidth that just 64 GB/s.
Even a kit of DDR5 dual channel, with a relatively low speed of 6000 Gbps, has a theoretical bandwidth of 96Gb/s.
If we start going to 6400 Gbps kits, we go above the 100Gb/s.
But on PC, it's not important to have high memory bandwidth. CPUs benefit much more from having low latency than memory bandwidth.
That's why it's normal to have DDR5 with latency of 70ns or lower. But with GDDR6, it's more in line with 150ns. Including on consoles.

As you show, the Series X GPU, has basically only 10Gb of memory. So when it needs to use more, it has to shuffle data from one pool to another. Something that the PS5 doesn't need to do.
 

Soapbox Killer

Grand Nagus
Steam Deck has 16 GB of unified RAM… also… define “running”. It is not like they designed it and sold it for Steam Deck…
SteamDeck is a great system so much so that it became my main way to play games of both my Series X/S and my PS5 because of portability but there is NO comparison in terms of what the hardware is capable of. Series S "should" be able to run anything that comes to SD without issue and those 16 GB of RAM shouldn't make a difference.


However, Wukong seems to have be designed with cards and consoles that haven't even come out yet so it's all very iffy.
Wukong on SteamDeck





A 7inch screen will hide some of this ugly but it looks "fine". (our definitions of the word "fine" may vary)
 

Panajev2001a

GAF's Pleasant Genius
SteamDeck is a great system so much so that it became my main way to play games of both my Series X/S and my PS5 because of portability but there is NO comparison in terms of what the hardware is capable of. Series S "should" be able to run anything that comes to SD without issue and those 16 GB of RAM shouldn't make a difference.


However, Wukong seems to have be designed with cards and consoles that haven't even come out yet so it's all very iffy.
Wukong on SteamDeck





A 7inch screen will hide some of this ugly but it looks "fine". (our definitions of the word "fine" may vary)

I think you may not have gotten my point, Steam Deck OLED is a pride and joy of mine.
16 GB unified is fine for it but 12 GB on Switch 2 might not be a lot at a higher resolution (1920x1080 likely target in handheld mode, I would prefer 720p or 900p, or much more when docked… vs 1280x800 on Steam Deck).
 

Three

Member
That fucking guy. I remember that Paul Tassi thread and adamsapple trying to push the agenda that it wasn't Series S. Trying really hard to push the 'exclusivity' angle:

And that's with more RAM than Series S too.
With these setting VRAM usage is 5.4GB and RAM usage 8.3GB on steamdeck.

But again, nobody is saying it's never going to release on it, just that they need more time to optimise for weak hardware like they said they did. so why are you so adamant to push this point DF are pushing or it 'running' on steamdeck?

To highlight that you can't just look at the PC versions minimum requirement of 16GB and say "that's why". There's plenty of examples of games with min 16GB RAM in the last 2~ years that have released and work fine on Series S.

Nobody said that's definitely why to the RAM issue either but that could possibly be the biggest optimisation effort. That's normal and not something controversial to suggest. The RAM amount is an issue on Series S. As I said your example of cyberpunk, on medium settings for example uses less RAM than Black Myth's low settings. The devs would take more time optimising RAM usage with reworked assets specifically for Series S than turning down sliders to match some steamdeck "running" state at sub-720p 19fps native/base framerate.
 
Last edited:

Soapbox Killer

Grand Nagus
I think you may not have gotten my point, Steam Deck OLED is a pride and joy of mine.
16 GB unified is fine for it but 12 GB on Switch 2 might not be a lot at a higher resolution (1920x1080 likely target in handheld mode, I would prefer 720p or 900p, or much more when docked… vs 1280x800 on Steam Deck).
Got you!


12Gb on NS2 (is that the right shorthand?) should be fine since it only has to render at a lower res and then let the Nvidia chip do the heavy lifting.
 

Three

Member
Tassi on damage control.

Guy is a clown. I said this in that thread:
Likely the same statement by MS being paraded as "a source with knowledge of the situation". Meanwhile Paul Tassi, the same person, was putting out articles a few days ago about "technical issues". They know f all and are just parroting the same statement they're getting sent.

Now he's come out and said that's who it was. Why didn't he just confirm MS was feeding him that bullshit before though? You know, when he had that contradictory story up and people were asking him.

Lmao at this too:
 
Last edited:

adamsapple

Or is it just one of Phil's balls in my throat?
That fucking guy. I remember that Paul Tassi thread and adamsapple trying to push the agenda that it wasn't Series S. Trying really hard to push the 'exclusivity' angle:

Once again, I can imagine you just salivating feverishly searching topics to find that zinger :messenger_grinning_sweat:

My post you quoted:

To highlight that you can't just look at the PC versions minimum requirement of 16GB and say "that's why". There's plenty of examples of games with min 16GB RAM in the last 2~ years that have released and work fine on Series S.

bobby-fish-wheres-the-lie.gif




16GB minimum

--


16GB minimum

--


16GB minimum

--



16GB minimum

--


16GB minimum

--


16GB minimum


---


16GB minimum


and so on and so on and so on
 
Last edited:
Top Bottom