Topic: The everything Xbox thread

Expand

@ThanosReXXX Rather than hashing through all that I will return to my very original statement (paraphrased) that started that whole mess: I hope the X1X CPU being weak and a poor choice doesn't prevent the concept of forward compatibility with the "X2".

Neither of you have really said much contrary to that original meaning. Blue also talked about the uncertain possibility of that, and you mentioned "forward compatibility" to some extent or another with X alone as possible as well. So far there's a lot of arguing but no actual disagreeing here.

I'll also add that missing out on making X a "bridge" of sorts would be missing a huge opportunity to shift the industry away from generations which Phil has indeed many times hinted toward doing/liking, and also, again, nothing in that video affirms positive or negative whether that will be the case or not. It drums up the new box, but that doesn't comment at all on what can or will or won't be done with X.

IIRC you and I had a conversation panning "mid gen bumps" back before they came out. That still holds true. PS4 Pro is kind of a joke but thankfully an underused joke. I like mine but mostly to give me the performance they promised my my OG box would have but didn't. It didn't really change their ecosystem (at all, a few third party games like Nier aside) so that's fair. X changed the ecosystem and was heavily touted. While I love my X I bought in with a hope that it was forward looking and not excessive marketing on a late stage short lived machine. If it turns out it was excessive marketing, I still like my X (I would never have bought an S since it didn't really give me much I didn't have with my PS4) but it will indeed make me more hesitant to jump on board their hype next time, and I'd be more likely to buy an OG PS5 that will probably be viable all generation, and wait for the inevitable "actual XBox Two" 5 years later than ump into an XBox Two early. Oddly I'd be more likely to buy in to Two if my X would run the new games, because I'd like the upgrade, and I won't feel like I'm funneling money into a planned obsolescence grist-mill. If the X doesn't run Two games, I'll see their strategy of planned obsolesence and just wait until I run out of things to play on X before buying into the next unit, expecting 2-3 "better" models will pass in that time.

I still have significant hope though that they're not planning on cutting X after a 2.5-3 year life. That would be a pretty awful hardware cycle in hindsight. Even WiiU had a longer shelf life (you can say "it's just a One" but they dedicated 2 E3s to presenting it and it was handled as a full console launch.

I'm not saying I actually believed it was a fully new console, I didn't. But their presentation and launch was either a hint of a more interesting long term strategy, or overhype marketing of the lowest calibre. My impression of XBox becomes very high if it's the former, and lower than Sony if it's the latter. My library is now tied up in XBox, and they do handle digital better than Sony, but I'd return to the lack of confidence in both of them I had in 2013. The fact that it's a 10 month old console and we're already debating it's soon obsolescence is an indicator of why that is a fail. Where Pro was just a premium SKU and nothing more, X has been showcased as a lot more significant than that. And it is indeed a lot more significant than that. How they handle that and what they do with that is most important though.

But back to my original comment, if it doesn't play forward compatible, it all comes down to a very poor choice of crippling CPU. That said, "new benchmark in console gaming" does not at all preclude the same software running on slower machines (X) at a lower benchmark.

Here's the thing that gets forgotting in this discussion. Xbox is just a PC. A customized PC, yes, but ultimately a PC. Look at PC games and the hardware supported in PC across many performance levels. The same will be true of X2 games. They will also be PC games. And those games will be designed to run on PC hardware that's both a lot more powerful than X2, and hardware that's less powerful than X1X. The games themselves will be designed for that at least for several years into it. PC game design has kind of hit an impasse as to the power levels needed. Previous consoles with special architectures far behind PC was a different thing. The games can run on that hardware. The question is how MS does or doesn't implement support for doing so. It's bold if they would do that. It's unfortunate if they don't (and the mix of how X was presented so far, and comments from Phil would sour my opinion of company messaging and, to use Reggie's words, how "fan forward" they are.) I.E. "old Microsoft never left"

But we'll see. Even you said "I could still see a moderate amount of "forward compatibility" happening, but only on the X".....that's all I was talking about originally

There's also the possibility I raised that if "X2" consists of both a powerful local machine and a "streaming device" (which would likely be a simple Apple TV type device....it doesn't take much for a streaming client other than the rumored "prediction" based latency mitigation (eeeewwww, I've railed and railed in text walls against that in Splatoon 2), but there's the possibility that X1 and/or even S are both "full fledged X2 devices", along with possibly Surface and/or any Windows 10 device. It would be slightly bait and switch that old XBoxes are only X2 compatible as a streaming client, but it would also be to the letter of the word accurate, if one of the X2 devices is just a streaming box. Of course 75% of the US wouldn't even be able to use that functionality, and I question what on earth they're thinking with a streaming box when even Crazy Yves who thinks X2 will be the last console before only streaming to phones and tablets exists releases AC: Odyssey streaming only in Japan because apparently someone told him the internet doesn't actually support that well anywhere else (and if you hadn't heard, PS Now is now copying Game Pass in allowing local download of games from PS2 & PS4 from the streaming library, but not for PS3 since the PS4 can't emulate Cell (if PS5 emulates Cell Game Pass will get a run for its money and have to enlarge it's library! The competition between those two is wonderful...PS already dropped the Now price to match Game Pass (for 12 mo/ subs only, for PS+ subscribers. Then MS may be forced to improve the GP value....win-win.) So with MS backing down from streaming with GP, then Sony backing down from streaming on the only mainstream streaming platform that exists Now, and Yves "one more gen before streaming only" releasing his flagship streaming game in only one country that doesn't have garbage internet....I'm not sure why now is the time MS is diving into a whole hardware unit just for streaming. "XBone" "XBox Done".....that's a new PR disaster in the wings.

BUT all the same, there's zero reason the 1X (and the 1S (and the OG One)) can't run the streaming client (along with all other win10 boxes)...the hardware in all of them is almost certainly far more than is needed to do the job, and that would make good on the "end of generations" (** needs streaming sub) talk. It won't work for most people in the US (crash and burn, Streaming Scarlett!) but it actually would work for me.....I could wait out most of the next gen working on my 200 game strong X backlog plus play the new hits streamed with a sub, then jump into new hardware when the X2X inevitably makes the X2 look bad (right before they discontinue it all? )

On a more on track note, Scream Ride is flipping awesome. I never heard of it before, but it's a hidden gem for sure. Weird, but arcade awesome. It's by Frontier, famed for Elite Dangerous. Also Kameo is really cool...never played it before. Ugly, but cool. Those early 360 games sure were rough in the texture department. Sonic Generations OTOH looks brand new. I also pre-loaded AC: Odyssey.....I have to laugh that the biggest AC game to date, finally an RPG, and X1X enhanced and the download size is like 43GB. How is such a huge brand new game smaller than half the other games on the platform? Wonder what RDR2's size is (no preload available for that so far....it's on order.)

Expand

@BlueOcean Thanks, and my pleasure, and I'll wrap the whole text wall swapping up right here, so rest assured that we will stay more on topic from here on out. (although: we didn't really go off topic in the first place, seeing as it was an Xbox-related discussion) I do have to confess that things have become much clearer now, with @NEStalgia's latest and quite elaborate explanation, so we are now actually able to agree, as you will see, on most of what has been said...

@NEStalgia Holy crap! I guess it wouldn't be too far from the truth, to say that you've hit a new high in text-wall size, unless I missed some of your other efforts, perhaps in forum and/or article threads where I wasn't involved...

I more or less promised to our discussion partner to not keep this dragging on, so I'll just stick to the two most relevant points:

First off, unless I missed that (in which case my apologies), I haven't really seen you explicitly say something about the X and/or even the S becoming streaming boxes, in relation to Xbox Scarlett, so that is probably also where a large part of our misunderstanding came from, both from me and @BlueOcean, so good that we finally have that in the clear now, and I could actually see that happening, so we do indeed agree on that part.

BUT.... current gen Xboxes being able to stream next gen Xbox games does in no way equate to what I was disagreeing about with you, and that is that your comments came across as if the X was going to be the S of the Scarlett, while statements of Phil Spencer himself strongly seem to point to a completely new machine, or even two, if the streaming box + local console rumor is to be believed.

That can be backwards compatible, obviously, and what I've said before about business sense, would be to not completely alienate current gen Xbox owners, by indeed making the X2 completely backwards compatible with the ENTIRE catalog of games that can now be played on the One, including previous gen titles.

Still doesn't make the X an X2 Lite, or whatever they're going to call it, though. And it possibly being able to stream X2 games also doesn't indicate much toward that being an option. Heck, the Switch is now able to stream Assassin's Creed Odyssey in certain regions, so if that isn't an indication of that point, then I don't know what is...

But my whole point with the "makes no marketing and business sense", was that they will of course want to move people to the newer device, and that is also why I expect it to be so fully compatible with everything we've seen and received so far, so that trading in your "old" X for the Scarlett won't hurt that much, seeing as you would still be able to play and/or download your entire existing game catalog.

Keeping the older consoles tagging along, even just as streaming boxes, could potentially mean people not choosing to move, which could also mean a negative impact on X2 sales, so one way or the other, they'll have to get rid of current gen platforms, and persuade people to get that brand new X2...

Second and last point: although the Xbox and PlayStation may have become more like PC's in a box than ever before, the software and architecture is still very much tailor-made (otherwise we would simply be able to install PC games on them), and in the case of the Xbox One, there are three hardware layers/components, that each take care of a single aspect of the device, so one for the OS, one for games, and one for media. That means that unlike with a PC, the entirety of the hardware isn't constantly taxed with running both the OS and a game (at the same time on all hardware components), because those tasks are divided between the three layers/components, to optimize performance.

That also means that the device still works quite differently, AND as previously mentioned, can be programmed in ways different than ordinary PC hardware, and also in a more efficient way, because it is tailor-made to do so, unlike PC's, which as you know, come in an almost "all colors of the rainbow" number of varieties. Software adapting to all that automatically could potentially still hold the hardware back, unless game sizes go through the roof.

I would hope that Microsoft is also going to improve upon that, either by means of compression or otherwise, because it's already clear that 4K addons for games are ever growing in size, so imagine if the premium version of the Scarlett is going to tackle 8K: it wouldn't even matter then if it is a streaming box or a local console, because the internet speed requirements to handle such amounts of data would probably be too much for quite a few regions, and not just in the US, but worldwide...

Unless of course, they're simply going to stick to 4K and focus on upping and locking that frame rate, in which case, my point is irrelevant...

As for Scream Ride: how come you've only now discovered that? It's been out for ages, relatively speaking.
I've already had installed on the Xbox 360, and it is indeed quite the entertaining game.

And I don't think Kameo looks ugly at all, or perhaps that is because I'm not sat with my face only an arm's length away from the screen...

My TV is almost exactly 10 feet away from my couch, 42 inch plasma panel, full HD.

But yes, that too is a good game. Then again: what do I know? As you know I recently downloaded and renewed my love for OG Xbox game Black, so apparently, I'm really not that much of an expert on what looks good on Xbox One or not...

@BlueOcean Okay, I'm done now...
How about that Banjo-threeie rumor, aye?

Expand

@BlueOcean XC1 Yeah I agree with the frustrations. But the side quests are totally skippable. I did very very few of them. They were horrible. Difficulty spikes usually involved "grind more" and "send Sharla packing. Also "know when to use Melia" was a big deal. But yea, I have a love hate relationship with XC. IT's very flawed. And yet so amazing.

@ThanosReXXX I think Ralek still beats my text walls regularly.

Rather than add too much more text walling, I'll just comment on a few specific points:

-X2 being a whole new box still doesn't preclude anything software wise on prior hardware unless it's an architecture change, and that's not happening.

-The hardware customness in the current gen doesn't really mean much for a game. There's just not much that has to be put into it versus PC for it to run on the new consoles, and especially XBoxen. I think you're overvaluing the old methodologies and ignoring the great standardization of the modern era games.

-Business wise, I do disagree that "MS wants to move people to the new box." If they are firmly doing the generation thing, then yes, they do. But what do they gain by pushing the new hardware? In the past it was the ability to sell new games. But if games were inherently multi-generational like with PCs? They don't need to sell a specific box. Hardware nets them little profits. They just need to sell any XBoxen to get people to lock into their subscriptions and game store. Including smartphone apps that stream XBox games. There's no money in the hardware, the money's in the MS Store, GP, and Gold. If X can't run the games, then yeah, they want you to buy new hardware so you will buy new games. If X can run the new games, people not moving on isn't a problem: They're still buying games! And it gives game makers a much larger install base in the early years of a console, alleviating one of the biggest problems early gen for publishers. There's a lot of benefit to that strategy for MS, for 3rd parties, and for customers. (Again, if that were to be their plan.) (again, though the CPU is the question mark as to how possible that will or won't be) but business-wise, if it is possible, everybody benefits, and nobody loses from that. Imagine how much better that looks for EA or Ubisoft moving into a new gen with already millions of installs and growing rather than starting new every gen? They all want their PC model on consoles and widest possible access to customers, and that really accomplishes that better than generational shifts. Yeah last gen they wanted to cut the prior gen loose but that's because they wanted to get away from PPC and get far away from CELL. Now that it's x86 they don't have the incentive to escape this gen's hardware so completely. And that would give them exactly that.

Again, for clarity, not saying if it's going to happen or not, given the CPU, but there's incentive, business wise, across the board for that kind of ecosystem of forward-compatibility. MS wins (more software sales through their stores, increased vendor lock to consumers), publishers win (big install base, PC-like sales model), consumers win (play new games just less pretty/performant as they could be on faster hardware....like PCs....) Hardware operates so close to margin now nobody really loses if you don't buy the new hardware as long as you buy the software and subs. (if it's possible.)

But yeah, at absolute minimum, I'd be stunned of the X (and maybe S, and probably Windows boxen) can't participate in the streaming service. That would bridge that gap for the 5 people in the US that have internet that can handle it It would be a cheap way out, but less cheap than if none of the new boxes were streamers. Though I might like it....I have a Surface Pro (not One, not X, not 4, not Scarlett, just "Surface Pro" ) Streaming onto it like a giant Switch would be kind of awesome. I do that sometimes already but then my local XBox needs to be on. If streaming actually worked well (it won't, but if it did ) it could be cool to just buy Surfaces instead of XBoxes going forward It's the more expensive route, but a lot more versatile! (seriously, best laptop ever....current form factor is incredible. I spent all day transferring three 128GB SD cards from Switches to 256GB ones the other day, outdoors, and still had 30% battery left, and my lap didn't get second degree burns )

There is one key issue with backward compatibility, plus forward compatibility: Will Scarlett even have a disc drive? Debatable these days, and if it's so much more powerful than X, the game sizes will not fit on discs in any case. How they address that will be interesting and it may end up as a fully digital console, even if it does have a disc drive. Unless it sticks with "disc size textures + enhanced textures downloaded" like X. In which case below-X quality games will actually be the Scarlett default! "All games have a required 40GB download to simply function" doesn't sound like a good way to sell a console even in 2020. Streaming is starting to sound ideal The hype train is forgetting that there may either be no physical media, that BC may or may not mean "digital purchases only", or that new game physical media may just be a "download booster" if it's not moving to "Cartridges", thumbdrives, etc.) Worrisome times!

Scream Ride LOL yeah, I never heard of it. It's the exclusive that slipped through the cracks. It's very simplistic in a lot of ways but it's really crazy fun!