DF Direct Q&A: Console Costs, Cloud Gaming and Graphics

Console prices, affordability and the cloud

The panel discusses Sean Layden’s suggestion that the industry should consider a $300 PS5 instead of a $1,200 PS6. Oliver questions whether a PS5 with the required memory, storage and game-capable chip could realistically reach that price, while Rich notes the limited scope for further cost reductions. John argues that current console hardware is sufficient and that development time, staffing and budgets are bigger constraints on games.

“The hardware is good enough for now.” — John Linneman

The discussion also considers cloud gaming as a way to make expensive hardware accessible. John objects to relying on cloud gaming as the only option, and the panel raises concerns about internet reliability, access, latency and the capacity needed for popular games. They discuss whether excess server capacity could be used for other workloads, while questioning the economics and practicality of that approach.

Could cloud computing add memory to consoles?

The panel considers whether cloud resources could act as extra RAM and extend the life of current consoles. They conclude that cloud memory cannot substitute for local RAM because of latency and bandwidth limits. Some tasks can be handled remotely when they are not time-sensitive, but real-time rendering depends on rapid access to data. They compare this with examples such as Microsoft Flight Simulator and streamed texture data, where work can be prepared or delivered with more room to absorb delays.

PS6 and Project Helix: path tracing and performance

The panel discusses whether a more powerful Xbox Project Helix could offer path tracing that a PS6 could not. They expect the systems to share key technologies, and suggest that differences in performance are more likely to affect resolution, frame rates or particular CPU-limited scenarios than to determine access to major graphics techniques. They also question whether graphical comparisons will decide the success of future consoles, given that the systems may not compete in the same way as traditional consoles.

FSR 4, QSSR and PSSR comparisons

The panel considers whether FSR 4 on Xbox, alongside QSSR and PSSR on PlayStation, will make console comparisons more varied. They say it is too early to judge without shipping games, but expect the upscalers to have broadly similar image quality because of their related technologies. Differences may still appear in specific games, including through how the methods are accelerated and the resolutions they target. Rich also notes that QSSR has not yet appeared in the expected range of older PlayStation games.

Frame generation on Switch 2

The panel asks why NVIDIA has not provided DLSS frame generation for Switch 2, despite frame-generation techniques being demonstrated on older RTX cards. Oliver points to possible compute costs, development resources and uncertainty about demand, while discussing developers’ use of FSR 3 frame generation on Switch 2. John is unconvinced by frame generation at low frame rates, citing added latency and visual artefacts. The panel discusses alternatives such as stable 30 or 40 FPS modes and notes that frame generation can require a lower internal resolution.

Looking ahead: the DF time machine

For a final question, the presenters imagine what they might be doing one, five and ten years in the future. John jokes about future versions of Grand Theft Auto 6 and Red Dead Redemption 3, while the presenters reflect on the unpredictability of games and their work. They close with a mention of the DF supporter programme and the end of the show.