Topic: The everything Xbox thread

@BlueOcean So history repeats itself, then. The previous game on Xbox 360 and PS3 was also superior on Microsoft's console. This actually makes the whole PS4 marketing campaign surrounding this game all the more pathetic. The only plus, and it's not even a real one, is the timed exclusivity of some content, but having that in a lower resolution and more unstable performance is hardly anything to cheer about.

Having said that, the difference between the X and the S versions is also pretty harsh, so I guess I'll have to skip this game until I am finally able to upgrade to an X, which is not going to be happening for quite a while, by which time we'll probably have found out what Scarlett is, and when it is supposed to arrive, perhaps making the late purchase of an X not even worth the trouble anymore...

Yes, it's jarring how Sony states that this game and Fortnite are better played on PS4 when they obviously aren't. I am wondering the level of noise this game will produce on PS4 and Pro as Metal Gear Solid V already made my PS4 sound like a hairdryer.

The difference between S and X is huge in this case, the resolution is 6.2x on X! So yeah, if you don't have an X and you are patient you could wait for Scarlett although I am pretty sure that it won't launch until 2020 at the earliest.

The truth is that the Pro version looks blurrier because of the artifacts typically derived from checkerboard with a few exceptions like Horizon Zero Dawn where the developers were able to do a good job.

What is really impressive is that X runs Read Dead Redemption 2 smoothly at 30 fps unlike all the other consoles on top of the native 4K resolution, providing a huge boost not only in visuals but also performance.

The game looks beautiful and deep in the gameplay videos and much more interesting than any GTA game in my opinion. Another game on my radar.

@NEStalgia No, the one case I described, actually was one of these pro-grinders. It was all over the news here, also because WoW was a pretty big thing over here, as it was in the rest of the world.

If it was just about eSports, then I would have remembered.

As for Scarlett: my words are still getting absolutely mangled and butchered here, so I'll try and explain my point, AND the ACTUAL facts one more time.

I literally NEVER said that Scarlett would be some kind of cut-off concerning the previous gen. I know it will be backward compatible in some way, shape or form, because Phil Spencer already mentioned that (also post-E3, by the way, so that assumption, that I based it upon E3 related info is wrong as well), and they want to keep this "family of Xboxes" being a continuous thing, which considering the current architecture, should also not be a very big issue for them.

Having said that, all of this still doesn't hold Scarlett back from becoming a full-on generational update.
I most definitely do not expect Scarlett to be what the X is to the S: a simple, and incremental hardware upgrade. That would not only be infinitely stupid, it would also be decidedly underwhelming.

Phil Spencer has repeatedly stated that it's going to be really powerful, and that it will NOT disappoint traditional console fans, so therefore, it MUST be an entirely new console. That doesn't exclude similar architecture and/or full backward compatibility with the entire, three generation-spanning software catalog that we now have.

So, where would that need to lead to? Microsoft now has this hardware advantage, and knowing that Sony isn't just going to rest on their laurels, and will react accordingly, they will need to come out guns blazing, and besides yet another hardware advantage, they should now also make bigger steps concerning software, because that is of course still an area in which Sony is far ahead of them, and will be for some time to come, at least for this generation.

And THAT is logic. Hampering a new system, by leaving previous gen consoles hanging onto it like a ball and chain dragging it down, because they need to be "forward compatible", would be another infinitely stupid decision. I can imagine that for some time to come, there will be some cross-gen titles, but only for the first part of Scarlett's life. After that initial period, things will need to move forward, and chords will need to be cut, for them to be able to make the most of the new hardware.

A good example of how the old would hold back the new, is the one title that we're actually talking about now.
I was never a fan of the whole "smeared with Vasoline" label, but for the first time, I've actually seen something that would qualify, and that is the Xbox One S version of Red Dead Redemption 2. The difference (with the X version) is quite stark, even more so than the difference between performance and graphics mode in a certain other game we previously discussed...

Just imagine that happening to Scarlett titles on the X, that would perhaps be accepted initially, but ultimately, people will want to see the full capacity of the hardware and these newer games, and the only way that the S or the X could even play a major role in that, would be if the streaming box rumor is actually true, but seeing as Microsoft and/or Phil Spencer haven't commented on that at ALL, I'm still considering that to be all that it is:
a rumor. An interesting one, but a rumor nonetheless.

@BlueOcean Yeah, the differences are pretty harsh, far as I'm concerned. But Sony does have a good marketing team, so they'll probably get away with it again...

It is most definitely on my radar, though. Except with the aforementioned reservations, so I'll just have to wait and see. And 2020 really isn't that far off for me, considering my backlog and available gaming time...

@ThanosReXXX Were there any 7th gen 3rd parties that weren't better on 360? I mean that's why I bought a 360. Multiplats on PS3 ran in various shades of bad often in ways that made the game frustrating. I tried...I really did....but I couldn't take it anymore.

Yeah I really don't get the marketing being so Sony dominant on this game when the PS4 is clearly not the lead platform. Ok, PS4 base beats XBox base, that's to be expected, it always does. But Pro isn't helping it much. This feels like a PC game from start to finish.

Scarlett: To clarify, every time I talk about forward compatibility you think I'm talking about backward compatibility. Nobody questions at this point backward compatibility as synonymous with the XBox brand, so of course that part is fine. I'm always considering forward compatibility with X to Scarlett ("X2 games running on X1X") We all thought that was going to happen, then after E3, we're not sure. If it launches in 2020 it probably won't. If they're announcing now, it really needs to. But it all depends if they're going on the "2 year hardware cycle" or not. There's a case for both strategies. The "old model" would always be the S to the X situation, only repeated more often (which kind of sucks for trying to not spend too much.)

We'll see. Ignoring X itself in the equation, there's tons of incentive for them to "PC-ify" the console space. In fact I'm quite certain they intend to do that. The Surface business model would work great for XBox after S/X proved that case on a short term scale (humorously Surface Pro 6 is identical to the "Surface Pro (not 5)" except for the CPU refresh. It still doesn't even have USB-C that everyone's been howling for for 2 gens.). If X isn't included you can bet Scarlett will be the "old base model" for numerous hardware revisions to come. At this point it's not "will MS do an incremental constant hardware refresh model", it's "does that model begin with X or with Scarlett going forward." If they announce hardware in 2018, almost certainly that model begins with X. If they don't announce until next E3 or later, it probably begins with Scarlett.

Whether I'm happy about that likely model or not.....I'm not sure yet. It sounds like it could either save money or make XBox a lot more expensive to stay in over time depending on how they implement it.

@BlueOcean the only negative about RDR2 I'm seeing is a lot of it reminds me of AC: Syndicate. Not that AC Syndicate is bad, but in that sense I'll play feeling like "Hey I've played this before!" at times. I do expect RDR2 will be superior though. Syndicate is good, better than ACIII by far, but not the best AC game.

@NEStalgia No, I know what you mean with forward compatibility, so no confusion there on my part at all.
Still think it's going to hamper/drag down any new console, though.

EDIT:
And besides, both forward and backward compatibility only have one meaning, so how anyone could confuse or misunderstand those, is beyond me.

@NEStalgia Nah, Red Dead Redemption 2 doesn't look like Syndicate, the world is big, rich and diverse and gameplay is much deeper.

@ThanosReXXX I think the big difference in our thinking on the potential of that is you believe it would hamper the new console. I'm quite positive that model wouldn't. PC is always a generation (or more) ahead of console, so we can see what the software capabilities would be for Scarlett on current PC. And we already know those games already run however they run on X. PC games will continue enhancing of course. Remember, with that model, if they're moving to the continuous cycle, we're not talking about hanging onto X for 7-10 years. We're talking about hanging onto it for 2, or maaaaaybe 3. For games that are already in development for PC currently. Yeah, X could run those fine. The model timeline/roadmap (if it were to theoretically work this way) would be:
Q4 2018-Q4 2019: X1 + X1S + X1X (Best visuals/performance)

Q1 2020-Q4 2022: Drop X1/X1S, Introduce XBox Infinite (Best performance/visuals, support "Play Anywhere on X1X and PC (specifications and performance vary) as well"

Q1 2022-Q2 2024 Introduce XI Plus (Best performance/visuals, remove "Play Anywhere" support for X1X, support "Play Anywhere" on XI and PC)

Q3 2024-Q4 2027 Introduce XBox Infinite Z (Best performance/visuals, remove "Play Anywhere" support for XBox Infinite (2020), support "Play Anywhere" on XBox Infinite Ultra and Windows 11 PCs.)

Regardless of if the 1X is part of that ecosystem or not, I'm fairly convinced that at minimum, starting with Scarlett that's the kind of roadmap they're going to have going forward, whether or not it includes X. It just makes the most sense for them to do that with their position and role in the console space. Meanwhile PS5 will try the 7 year console cycle again, but will eventually cave to copy. And Nintendo will make a plastic accordion with an 8" screen that plays video games where the inputs come from you playing sea shanties, because Nintendo. There will be a limited Tingle edition at launch.

etc. Basically, hardware as a service..... For better or worse

@BlueOcean Definitely. Gameplay is certainly a lot more sophisticated in RDR2 and the world isn't the same 5 activities copy and pasted all over the map. But when I look at the streets and coaches I keep thinking Syndicate.

@NEStalgia But it would hold the newer console down. I don't understand why you don't see that, seeing as it is crystal clear to me. I think that your mistake is that you're doing a 1:1 comparison to PC's.
It is true, obviously, that consoles are getting closer and closer to being a PC in a custom box, but there's still quite a few custom components in there, and as previously discussed, consoles will always be programmed far closer to the metal, so in that respect, they're also not directly comparable to PC's.

Now. what I meant with forward compatibility holding down the newer console, is that I see this more or less forcing developers to take into account, that the newer games must also be able to run on the older system, and as such, they could NEVER maximize the potential of these newer games, much less the newer hardware. The PC model, where you have a mid range vs a high end gaming rig, doesn't apply here at ALL.

And I'd like to replace your "incremental" with "revisional", which would bring it back to the normal state of affairs that was, and which should have been. The original Xbox One should never have been, and it's even kind of questionable if the S should have been a thing either, because the X is everything that the Xbox One should have been in the first place.

So, I'm not against improvements during generations, but it would be better if it would just consist of a trajectory such as has happened with the previous gen consoles, where both Sony and Microsoft simply released several improved models of the original PS3 & Xbox 360.

I don't think incremental is either a given, or a necessity, if the going back to the drawing board behavior on Xbox One is anything to go by. They'd better release the "X" version of Scarlett right out of the gates, instead of first letting millions of people buy a Scarlett S, only to find that there's going to be a far more improved model, that will make their console look rather meh in comparison...

The Play Anywhere thing can easily be explained away, without it ever having to impact the console department in and of itself, or having Microsoft shift the Xbox division into a carbon copy of their Surface department. Seeing as we're now already able to play Xbox games on PC, they can just further that development into other devices, so that in the next generation, or after 2020, we will be able to play (stream) Windows 10 versions of Xbox games on our smart devices. And then simply extend that catalog, instead of sticking to the (in comparison with the Xbox) only handful of titles that are available for Windows 10 now.

@ThanosReXXX Again that's what I'm saying is the difference in our conclusions, your'e very convinced that it would hold back the new console, while I don't think it would.

You're thinking console vs. PC at a hardware level, but you need to consider the actual software design. "The PC model, where you have a mid range vs a high end gaming rig, doesn't apply here at ALL."

Yes, it does. The games are designed for PC in the majority of cases. Console ports are ports of PC games. Not for Sony exclusives, but definitely for Microsoft exclusives and nearly all 3rd party (some Japan studios excluded.) The game design, engine, everything has already been designed for that very "low, mid, high" range. It's not a separate game made for console, it's just optimization for a specific spec. That was why the industry wanted the move to x86 in console to begin with, so they could roll it into their design environments as more or less unified. When you look at RDR2, you're looking at a PC game. Designed arouThey alnd Steam and it's various form factors. so customized a port tuned for PS and XBox models. Same with Assassin's Creed, and even Horizon 4, Motorsport 7, Crackdown 3. These are all PC games first and foremost in design, and the designs have already been designed to scale to different hardware. The slowest PC that they spec is what limits the game's overall design. But, also, that's not stopping them from scaling up to take full advantage of SLI GTX titans on a dual i7. Adding two or 3 XBox models so long as they fit into the performance specs of the PCs they're targeting is a trivial expense to add compared to the dozens of video cards, sound cards, motherboard sets etc that must be tested for PC. TL;DR; There's really no way the different XBoxes would limit software design, only how software runs on that hardware. Not within the scope of time each "model" would be supported.

But again, for this debate, let's remove the X, because I think adding X, and that generation is confusing the conversation. We'll start with Scarlett. Let's assume Scarlett is the starting point of this new product model (and it probably is. The X thing may happen, but I think we can more clearly discuss this if we presume it won't.)

My prediction could be wrong here, as always, it's a prediction and an analysis from an armchair, but I'm going to say that I do absolutely believe MS does not intend to do "console generations" starting with Scarlett. There's little incentive to do hardware + revision and tons and tons of benefit in multiple directions (for them) to move it to the iterative approach. And MS has a long history of trying to shake up the console model (for better or worse). It's Sony that stays entrenched in the status quo. I'll certainly admit I'm wrong, possibly with great relief, if I'm wrong. But I (possibly unfortunately) do believe that's the future model of XBox. The bi-annual (ish) iterative cycle. I'm 50/50 on the whole X thing. But Scarlett and beyond? I'm absolutely counting on the iterative cycle indefinitely. Every 2-3 E3s there will be a new hardware model perpetually after that. They got a taste of Hardware as a Service. Both MS and Sony were toying with that idea before it was proven. Now it was proven as a "mid gen refresh". They proved it's viable. They'll stick with it and see how far they can push it, and that both helps them sell more hardware like the phone/tablet/laptop/video card model, and helps the industry. This model would be developer (publisher) friendly. The industry hates console cycles. Late console means weak hardware to worry about well below PC specs they want to support. Early console means small install base. Each cycle means fragmenting the install bases. PC just perpetually moves forward. Fell behind? Too bad, keep up, buy more stuff. But that's efficient for publishers. Phase 1 for Ubi/EA/Acti was make consoles x86 compatible PC clones. Step 2 is make the upgrade process similar. That removes a lot of uncertainty from their financials. And XBox is interested in both being the platform most accessible for publishers/studios, and unifying their PC business. It's a perfect fit.

I do agree the OG should never have been. And S was questionable with X coming out afterward.

I totally agree with you about "release Scarlett X" first. But if I'm right, that's not happening. X comes out 2 years later. Followed by X2 2 years after that. Then X3 2-3 years after that, etc. Got Surface Pro 3? Surface Pro 4 is out, upgrade today! Got a Galaxy S7? Galaxy S8 is out next month! iPhone X? this year it's the iPhone XS! Don't fall behind! Such is current tech hardware. That's a juicy opportunity to miss in favor of 1990's console generation business models. Oh they'll go on about Scarlett being revolutionary and the most powerful. Then they'll do it again for Scarlett X 2-3 years later.

Summarizing, from my own perspective, no multiple models doesn't impact game design since it's already impacted by PC, and ultimately helps the publishers by ending the idea of console cycles. Ignoring X, I think it's near certain they're going to do the iterative perpetual hardware cycle starting with Scarlett if not with X, and that like with computers and phones, you'll be reminded bi-annually that you now have the obsolete model and need to keep up and start over. It's a powerful motivator.

I don't like it, you don't like it, but I strongly believe that's the future of XBox (and Playstation when they inevitably copy the model which they publicly toyed with themselves a few years back.)

Would it benefit MS? Yes.
Would it benefit major publishers? Absolutely.
Would it benefit consumers? Potentially but probably not.
Would it extract more money from consumers while yielding more profitability for MS and publishers? Yup.

Sounds like a solid business plan.

OTOH it could end up being a good value, depending on its implementation depending on how longterm the longterm support is by not forcing upgrades on hardware as often if, for example, you don't care about 4k, or 8k, or whatever.

I just don't see them doing the 6-8 year console cycle ever again. And the "mid gen refresh X model" doesn't solve core industry desires that would be solved with the iterative model in the games as a service era.

None of that factors in the streaming effect however. I'm not convinced that's going to take off right now, but we know publishers are going to try, and it will influence the industry in some unknown way.

Edit: Between you, me, Ryu, Ralek none of us know how to have short conversations without wall amplifiers

You know that it's a @NEStalgia post when you have to roll your finger twelve times to reach the next comment.

@BlueOcean That's...

true.

Thanos only needs 10. Ryu still wins at 15.

@DarthNocturnal

@NEStalgia But Ryu is an occasional guest...

@BlueOcean That's only because Ryu is PC Master Race and rarely touches her XBox, and her PS4 is still in moving boxes for like a year.

@NEStalgia Huh? Can ya'll at me if ya'll are going to talk smack? gives side eye

Also I am not PC master race (I'm only running 1 GTX980ti which means I'm a dinosaur to those people). I am a multisystem gamer. Says it in my profile pokes out tongue I just don't set my stuff on fire, like some people. And I'm an occasional guest for two reasons. A) I spend less time on nintendolife right now in general. B) Xbox one got delegated to my tertiary system as the system with the most fighting games get puts as my secondary (since I know Nintendo will never win that match) and this gen that is PS4. The only reason I bought a 360 was VF5 online which was the best version at the time. I would have been way more active had I joined during the 360s hey day. But that would have been full of ME rants and I know nobody wants me to kick that horse.

Also to my defense I text wall in part because I peck on my answer in between work. I rarely get online when at home...usually studying.

And whatever my playtime is for AC:Sparta is what I put in for the xbox... pretty much.. I really have not used it much. I dont know where the PS4 is (box wise that is)...which is sad as I've bought like 5 games for it this year.

Don't forget that in 17 hours is the start of your last chance to get the Forza Horizon 3 Forzathon barn finds.

Everything will still be active, it's just that the Forzathon events of Horizon 3 are ending [I think] now that Horizon 4 is out. Both barn finds have been merged into the same challenge, and unless they get added without needing the Forzathon challenges, they will have gone for good - thus meaning true 100% in-game completion is impossible.

@DarkRula Yes, the 2 barn finds are in 1 Forzathon now which is active 26th October - 2nd November (starts in a few hours).

@Grumblevolcano what do you mean last chance?

Im with darth

Wait aren't Barn finds part of the solo campaign?

Haha, yeah, indeed. I'm literally afraid of nothing or no one, but of late, I've almost come close to dreading going to Nintendo Life, fearing that one of those notifications at the top right corner of the page is going to say "NEStalgia mentioned you in the Xbox One/Xbox 360 thread"...

Well, I'm going to try to stay under that 10 pages that you mentioned me usually doing...

You do know that I'm a sales & marketing professional, right?
Most of what you propose, makes no sense from that point of view, not because I want to be the only one that's right, or because I want to dismiss what you say "because reasons", but because I really genuinely do believe that, looking at it from the aforementioned point of view, so it really isn't all that viable to me at all.

Yes, I mentioned PC hardware, but obviously what I meant by that, is the difference in architecture. Where in PC's a multitude of architectures and/or hardware is entirely acceptable and has been for decades already, it is still pretty new ground in consoles. The current iterative models do nothing to change that fact.

On a side note: change "games are made for PC" to "games are made on PC's", and I'll completely agree with you. PC workstations have always been the tool to get games onto consoles, so nothing really new or exciting has happened in that regard, so we can dismiss that point, other than making the factual observation that consoles themselves have grown closer to PC's, but I've already mentioned that previously.

And you REALLY do need to heed Phil Spencer's words more. He doesn't mince words, so there can be no other interpretation of them, than the literal meaning of what he says.

He has literally said that there will be no more stop-gap models, and that dedicated console fans need not fear because, and I quote: "the next Xbox console is going to be the benchmark in console gaming".

A benchmark denotes performance/power, unlike a standard, which could basically be used as a label to slap onto anything that a company considers new, innovative and/or future proof.

Besides that, Phil also literally stated that traditional console gamers need not fear, and that they would most definitely be catered to with the next Xbox. Now, that part doesn't necessarily disqualify the next Xbox being another iterative model, but I still have my doubts, based upon all that has happened so far, and based upon what has been said.

Contrary to popular belief, there are actually quite a lot of people, that DON'T like the PS4 Pro or the Xbox One X, or to put it more correctly: the reason for their existence and how they came to be, because they truly DO feel like stop-gap systems, that put a knife in the back of a hell of a whole lot of people, that were early adopters of the base models of both consoles. So, I don't think that there's going to be all that many people that are going to fall for similar shenanigans again in the coming generation.

And things and/or methods can most definitely be profitable and good for companies, but the most important thing to remember is that the target audience actually has the power to either accept that, or burn that to the ground. Just look at the launch of the Xbox One...

Companies NEED target audiences (dòh), otherwise, all those positive outcomes you mentioned won't ever occur, so they can only go so far into alienating their respective audiences, and as such, I honestly don't know if the whole S and X trajectory is going to be repeated in the next generation, and more importantly, if it actually SHOULD, which to me is a definite no.

In the unlikely event that I'm somehow completely wrong, I'm not going to admit that, and will instead apply for a job at Microsoft's Xbox marketing department, because they would be doing something horribly wrong, and would have apparently forgotten all the mistakes they've already made so far...

In closing, I would like to invite you to watch this video. It's factual, which the guy who makes them is known for, and more importantly: even though he also agrees with some of what you said, he mostly agrees with me... (heheheh)

But in all seriousness: it's a good video, and he sums up everything pretty nicely, concerning the next console and the online and Play Anywhere service, so it's well worth 9 minutes of every Xbox supporter's time.

Well, that's it from me, concerning this topic. The rest of the world is all rolled up into the whole US bomb letter affair and Red Dead Redemption 2 anyway, so we need to move on to stuff that might incite a few less text walls...

Project xCloud Officially Revealed For Xbox One | Console Quality Gaming On Any Device

@DarthNocturnal You got excited about the prospect of seeing an ice cream van? The last time that happened to me, was probably when I was 10...

It might look entertaining or funny, but performance-wise, it would of course be an absolute abomination to use in a racing game, unless they'd give it some otherworldly powers, to turbo-charge it into being a good competitor for ACTUAL race cars...

Now that's something I've never heard my ex say...

@Grumblevolcano I positively HATE these timed events with exclusive content, and I also don't like games more or less pushing me/tempting me to do stuff, especially if it can only be done in x amount of time.

As if I don't already have enough on my plate with life, work, and the massive back log in games that I have.
But I guess I'll give it a go regardless. I'm hoping that some YouTuber makes a video about it, so I can just drive to it and pick it up, instead of having to search for it for hours on end...

I couldn't see any achievements on the achievement page past 7th December (it's been like this for the past month, maybe longer) so I figured maybe Forzathon for FH3 ended on 7th December.