Jump to content
IGNORED

Xbox One X


Bojangle
 Share

Recommended Posts

14 minutes ago, Yoshimax said:

 

It also plays into the whole crossplay thing about expanding the playerbase for faster and more skill accurate matchmaking which we have seen in a limited fashion in Gears4, moreso in RL and I suspect will very much feature in Forza7. Stanley appears to be on a mission to tell everybody in as many ways as possible not to buy the X. I'm not really sure why we are meant to be upset that PC gamers get to play Xbox games? Why is that a problem? He is making out it is but doesn't seem to grasp the fact we don't all want to play on PC never mind the fact that if we do the games and all progress transfer across seamlessly.

 

Gears 4 crossplay is now fully integrated into public horde and versus with an option to turn it off if wanted. It's gone from a dev playlist thing to full functionality and it's great. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 16/06/2017 at 12:53, footle said:

 

Couple of points:

 

- Sony dropped Backwards Compatibility because it required additional hardware parts.

 

 

Interestingly enough, on the PS3, Sony had both a working PSP and PS2 software emulators for it, they were just never used for much outside of some commercial offerings and have worse compatibility than the hardware solution does. So doing emulation of completely different hardware in software is something they are entirely capable of, as the PS2 on PS4 emulator also recently demonstrated. It's all the associated testing and certification bullshit that makes it more financially questionable to support.

 

Though official emulators will always pale to what some geniuses can come up by reverse engineering it, something I much prefer to official emulation with all its pointless restrictions.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Sony's problem with PS2 titles is requiring that they have unnecessary trophy support patched in, and it seems no-one can be bothered with the effort and cert costs outside of a limited number of titles. It's a stupid, short-sighted move considering the wealth of brilliant software available on the PS2. They could (and should IMO) have allowed disc-based PS1 and PS2 emulation and explained why it was impossible to do PS3 that way and referred people to PSNow if they wanted those titles.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

11 hours ago, Stanley said:

I think this is a problem facing Xbox X anyway. What's the point in spending £450 on a machine which is more restricted than a PC, and has no exclusive games? Might as well put the money towards a PC which offers a much bigger library of games including Xbox One titles. And it has VR support. 

 

I do think it would have been great if it offered Rift support from the off with the promise of a cheaper more integrated headset some time down the line. 

 

VR's still too small a market for consoles. Credit to Sony for dipping its toe in the water but I think everyone's learnt from 2017 not being as big as they thought it would be for VR. 

 

That and the the last thing they needed at their conference was VR VR VR. 

 

Oh oh and good luck finding a pc that will do 4K gaming for £450. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I think Phil is biding his time, knowing their software solution to VR isn't quite ready. It's obviously coming, they've already announced headsets for Windows 10, and IIRC the minimum spec wasn't demanding so X will surely do it.

 

Edit- I was 2 pages back when I wrote that. VR may or may not be "too small" for consoles, but it may not matter if Microsoft do this generic Win 10 approach.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

9 hours ago, rafaqat said:

 

Oh oh and good luck finding a pc that will do 4K gaming for £450. 

This is always an odd response. The point is that if you're a high end enthusiast type gamer, you'll find a PC which not only matches an Xbox X, but outperforms it. In addition it has more functionality and a greater library of games. 

 

£450 for a console is expensive. If Xbox had any exclusives anymore then perhaps this model would be attractive to that high end market, but like I say they can do all that and more on their fancy PCs.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

For more than twice the cost.

 

How come you say £450 is expensive for a market leading console but £350 for a VR solution is 'affordable' ? I simply don't agree. VR won't have any uptake until it's £150-200 and does away with the cables.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Market leading? I don't think so.

 

I didn't actually mention VR in my last post, but the previous point about it being affordable meant that it's been brought into the realm of consumer electronics whereas previously it was way too expensive to bring to market.

 

It's clearly not at a mass market price yet, but then neither is the Xbox One X. The difference is that one brings whole new experiences to gaming, the other plays the same games at a higher resolution.

 

And that brings us back to backwards compatibility - clearly not a system seller, not used by many, and yet seen as important compared to VR which is still considered too niche to bother with.

 

Personally I'd like to see new IP from MS, proper AAA system exclusives, and support for VR, rather than doubling down and consolidating what they already have.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I don't think they've ever said once it's a mass market product hence calling it a premium system.

 

Is this the same Stanley that's been saying solidly for the last four years that this generation isn't about exclusives? What's happened to him?

 

And what's up with the desperate need to shoe horn backwards compatibility back into the conversation again? It's starting to read like a petty gaf smear campaign. If you can't see the huge benefits of BC then it's your loss. Not everyone wants to needlessly throw away all of their digital purchases from the previous generations.

 

Personally I'd like too see new IP from MS.

 

Why? You'll just say it's available on PC so doesn't count/isn't worth bothering with.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

There's no desperate need to do anything, I'm just saying what I think. There's no agenda. I have used backwards compatibility myself, and will probably continue to do so, I just don't think it's a priority. Yes, it's a nice feature, and would be great if Sony had it too.

 

You're getting upset for no reason. I'm glad that you find value in where MS is right now. 

 

As for your last point. I don't own a gaming PC, and I don't plan on buying an X, but I have an Xbox One. I'm just finding fewer reasons to play on it compared with Sony and Nintendo's offerings these days, sadly. And that doesn't look like it's going to change for a while. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

37 minutes ago, Stanley said:

And that brings us back to backwards compatibility - clearly not a system seller, not used by many, and yet seen as important compared to VR which is still considered too niche to bother with.

 

 

You've mentioned this a few times now, where you are you getting this "not many people use BC" thing from?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I'm pretty sure Spencer said something to the effect that he wanted room-scale VR on the Xbox, but when the control systems, and tracking solutions are more mature (i.e. you don't need cables trailing everywhere and sensors all over your walls). I've no doubt MS will bring VR to the Xbox, and it's very silly to compare a £1,500+ PC+VR setup to a £450 console.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I exited the Xbox eco system probably after the highpoint Sunset Overdrive and was hoping for a bunch of unknown exclusives to be E3 revealed to spark a xboxx purchase.

Personally, I think Phil (and I really like the guy) fucked up E3. He bet on quantity rather than quality.

For a year they have been banging on about power and true 4K , seemingly winding up for a big presentation haymaker, only to seemingly throw a weak punch in the first 5 minutes and then further dilute the excitement of a new system by chucking too many games into the mix in too quick succession without any pacing or human delivery for you to appreciate the titles. And then following it all up with slides featuring S and X. When they kicked off on Forza I knew it wasn't going to go well.

I'm excited about playing PUBG on a console and Sea of Thieves, but the paltry list of truly exclusive big hitters makes me wonder if  I should buy an XboxS to play the same games in scaled 4K, rather than spend 450 quid on a box that doesn't seem to have much validation in existing beyond 'if you want the best'. Even that statement is qualified when publishers seemingly are intent onkeeping some titles in parity between PS4 Pro and X. 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

By the time XboxX releases in November I believe you will be able to put together a comparable PC for the same cost with better functionality I.e. running your favourite last and current gen games at 60fps*, fully modular, VR compatible, all Xbox exclusives going forwards. If you have a irrational hate of PC's then irgnore me :P

 

*if your willing to lower graphic settings and play at 1080p

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I'm more than likely getting an X due to having a 4K HDR Tv to benefit from it but you can't deny the reveal was a bit of a damp squib. Like people have noted this E3 should have been heavy with MS's reasons to make you buy an X. It sadly wasn't all that. The price has spooked a lot of people but if they had followed up that price with some sure fire only capable on X content then that could have been dandy. As it was they didn't do that. Yes Forza looks sweet and so does Anthem but where were the others. Anthem will look tasty on a Pro and Forza will look gorgeous on a One S. They needed something more. I don't know what but whatever it was it was needed to justify the 499 price. They should have also had a little bit more on the presentation side. For all intents and purposes this was a new console launch, it needed more of the human element as opposed to heavy game streaming, a bit more of the sales patter and future road plan etc. I get that's what people want from these gigs in general nowadays, with criticism about sales targets blah blah blah at previous conferences but they dropped a bollock swerving a more in depth explanation/plan talk for the X launch.

 

It looks a lovely machine and as I say I'm there day one, will punt my One S a week or two before launch. But I think their showing at E3 was poor. They needed to go big with software and a better sell at the on stage reveal. I don't care if Phil did the rounds later, as nice of a guy that he seems he should have been in full on sales mode on that stage. I normally watch the big three or so at E3 and then it's mostly done, in my eyes. I'll catch up on the smaller stuff and the drip fed info from the rest of the show on somewhere like here. Those big reveal conferences are the place to push your message to a lot of people who tune out after the big three have aired. They failed at that in my opinion.

 

 Forza in true 4K HDR is enough for me but not for a lot of folk I'd imagine.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Yes but you're talking about games that people can play on their Bones, these games will look good enough on the old hardware as far as we could see, going by their conference anyway. They needed to show some brilliant differences between iterations. Now if say, Crackdown has stuff going on in it that looks incredible on the X over a base machine then they should have shown that. They were scared to do side by side stuff, or just couldn't be bothered to big up the differences. Who knows, when it launches the X version of some games may have secret sauce all over the shop. I hope they do but if so they should have shown that on stage at E3.

 

Again to me it's a day one but then I'm someone who can see the benefit of a patched 4K Horizon 3 and know that I'll appreciate back catalogue 4k patches.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

42 minutes ago, simms said:

By the time XboxX releases in November I believe you will be able to put together a comparable PC for the same cost with better functionality I.e. running your favourite last and current gen games at 60fps*, fully modular, VR compatible, all Xbox exclusives going forwards. If you have a irrational hate of PC's then irgnore me :P

 

*if your willing to lower graphic settings and play at 1080p

 

Digitally Foundry seem to think that it'll be good value for money over PC for a while; they've just done a convincing article on how tech progress (and therefore cost reductions) are slowing across the board. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

When Spencer said he had 'scoured the world' for games with new ideas, I think he meant that literally. And I dont think Sony is in a better position. Spiderman? uh huh.

 

Triple A videogame production has been hamstrung by a kind of creative bankruptcy for a few years now; most of the new ideas are coming from so-called 'indie' developers, and the major publishers are focussing on one or two main productions. Much has been written about this, but its worth keeping in mind when looking at the release schedules of at least Sony and Microsoft; it seems a bit unfair to criticize either of them for having few exclusives, or a flat lineup or whatever.

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 minutes ago, ronin said:

When Spencer said he had 'scoured the world' for games with new ideas, I think he meant that literally. And I dont think Sony is in a better position. Spiderman? uh huh.

 

Triple A videogame production has been hamstrung by a kind creative bankruptcy for a few years now; most of the new ideas are coming from so-called 'indie' developers, and the major publishers are focussing on one or two main productions. Much has been written about this, but its worth keeping in mind when looking at the release schedules of at least Sony and Microsoft; it seems a bit unfair to criticize either of them for having few exclusives, or a flat lineup or whatever.

 

 

Really? 

 

The Last Guardian

Nioh

Nier Automata 

Horizon Zero Dawn

Resident Evil 7 VR

Persona 5

Gravity Rush 2

Polybius

Star Trek

Farpoint

 

And that's just a handful off the top of my head released so far this year. There's a massive disparity between MS' and Sony's lineup at the moment. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, rafaqat said:

 

It's almost as if there isn't this consumer out there that just wants a powerful console that can do 4K without the baggage that comes with PC gaming.  I don't want to tinker with my games.to squeeze a few more frames out of them.  I don't want to download the latest nVidia drivers released specifically for the big pc game that just got released. I don't want to have to look around for why I might have some driver conflict causing a game to stutter. I don't want to be staring at an online game and wondering where all the players are (been a few comment on here about some games being dead online within months). Obvious some people like that tinkering and knowing they have the latest drivers tuned to the latest release and be able to buy games cheaper.   But that's not me.  And seeing how big the console space is, there's plenty like that.   We want a decent amount of power. We don't want what else that comes with PC gaming.  I am happy to pay £450 for essentially a fixed spec PC that beats any other similar priced PC out there right now and avoid all that.  

That's cool but that demographic really is the dot within the dot isn't it. Bearing in mind Sony are market leader outselling Xbox 2:1 (more in some territories) and their Pro console is only selling for every 1/5 PS4 sold, and it's £100 cheaper etc.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, Stanley said:

That's cool but that demographic really is the dot within the dot isn't it. Bearing in mind Sony are market leader outselling Xbox 2:1 (more in some territories) and their Pro console is only selling for every 1/5 PS4 sold, and it's £100 cheaper etc.

 

I guess we'll see. Ps4Pro and Xbox X are the premium consoles still. The base consoles will carry on selling more than the premium ones for at least another 2 years easily.  Saw on a podcast the other day that only 10% of american homes have 4K TV's. End of the year they reckon it'll be 20%. Back end of next year 40%. We'll likely see a decent uptick in the base/Premium ratio at that point.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
 Share

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue. Use of this website is subject to our Privacy Policy, Terms of Use, and Guidelines.