Topic: The everything Xbox thread

And I guess I bought Link's Awakening. But that game falls into the same category as SOTC. The remake is visually so distinct, it may as well be a new game. LA was still too expensive if you ask me.

They are not "old games" that "run the same" on next-gen and that you play "again". There are tons of games I have missed and some of them I stopped playing because of the frame rate in spite of being a huge fan, e.g., Monster Hunter World.

On Series X/S you get Auto HDR, higher resolution, higher frame, better texture filtering... Does it mean that I feel like playing Watch Dogs again with Auto HDR? No but there are so many games that I haven't played yet, first-party, third-party and backwards compatible games. There are games that I'm ready to re-play, superb classics and amazing "infinite" games like Forza Horizon 4 and Sea of Thieves. One of my friends plays Sea of Thieves almost exclusively on Xbox One X, do you know what it means for him being able to play his favourite game at 60fps on Series X? Just a single game makes a difference for some but every single game will play better on Series X. I almost considered getting Sekiro because of how smooth it plays on it.

When they say "Xbox has no games" they mean "Sony's games are better" and I disagree. @NEStalgia and I have discussed many times why Xbox has more "gamey" games than Sony, and that's the important thing to me and I don't say this as an Xbox fan but that was my first conclusion this generation when I had a PS and an Xbox for the first time in my life. What are my favourite PS4 games? Wipeout Omega Collection, Ratchet & Clank and Knack II, they are "gamey" games. I don't care about the rest (I wanted to try God of War with my Now trial but it was quickly removed) and I've played them. I have played every single Uncharted game except the Vita one, all on PS4. I have played some of those glorified interactive films with bad gameplay like The Last of Us. Tomb Raider is better than Uncharted (as a game, not as a film) and Resident Evil is better than The Last of Us. Of course, some people love their Sony games but it's so biased to consider them "objectively better" than Microsoft's or independent games because they aren't, they are the linear semi-open world clones with mediocre gameplay! It's not just Sony, Gone Home is the most overrated indie rubbish I've ever played (a walking simulator, I know). Write something witty and you get 10s. Unravel is the best indie game I've played this generation and I had not even heard about it.

In short, you can like them as much as you want and smile and cry while forgiving the mediocre gameplay but Sony's games aren't better. Most of the stuff that I want to play is on Xbox because a big of part of it is third-party and because Microsoft has 23 studios now. Nintendo has very few games that draw my attention because 80% of the good ones are Wii U games that I already own and Nintendo wants me to pay full price again and I say no, no, no.

Well, there's no such thing as an objectively good game. And I don't think I've ever said that. I gravity towards single-player action-adventure games, and most of Sony's and Nintendo's games fall in that category.

I like single-player games as well. I like 2D and 3D platformers, the Tomb Raider games (old and new), every main Resident Evil game, Assassin's Creed (the first one is awesome and the recent ones too), RPGs (some), Western RPGs (some), Uncharted 2, 3 and 4 (in spite of the mediocre gameplay) but not The Last of Us, Days Gone and the like, that kind of Sony experience is not for everyone and definitely not for me and other Sony games (Horizon, Spider-Man) are not bad but not as good as the third-party games that they are inspired by.

I'm very excited about Avowed, Everwild, Fable... Fable is one of the best games I've ever played and Avowed looks like Skyrim evolved. Everwild, well, it's Rare, they always make interesting games. Even Grabbed by the Ghoulies (I love the title, ghoulies mean balls, I assume).

@Octane Microsoft didn't suggest that ZeniMax games will be available on PS5. Quite the opposite.

@Octane well theresa difference between "i don't want to replay games i recently played" and "i don't want to play old games much better than they played before" they're are hundreds of "old"games you haven't played. They'll play better than before on xb. They won't play better on ps. That's not trivial if you don't get all games you want and play them at launch. If you've never played, say hitman 2 and decide to 3 years from now, is it an"old"game, especially if it looks and plays better than it did on 2019 hardware?

@blueocean Spiderman remaster is an embarrassment on every convenable level. It's embarrassing they're charging for a patch. It's embarrassing they're trying to call a patch a remaster in an already brand new game. It's embarrassing they have insomniac, a previously reputable studio, insisting they spent sooo much time on it. Is embarrassing they had insomniac spending sooo much time on it in 2 years while also working on the dlc, mm, and r&c but also have tons of time to spend remastering the game they just released. It's embarrassing that when they finally deign to show what sooo much work was about we see basically ray tracing and an inexplicably replaced actor/model and really little else. Is embarrassing theyir pr isn't in front of this train wreck. And it's embarrassing that the fans are going out of their way to justify it all.

Imho, that game was never meant to be sold as a remaster. I think it was meant as a value priced bundle for both games for new players. And this is where their pr melts down. If they jumped in front of it, said " of COURSE all Spiderman copies get upgraded to the enhanced visuals for ps5! Mm ultimate is a value priced bundle so new fans can catch up at a fantastic price!". The wild problem would have turned into a sales pitch. Instead they let the internet spin it, hid, doubled down on half truths, then sent insomniac out to go die on their hill. It's sad that what could have been a good will generating product they turned into penny pinching smoke and mirrors. Wonder if they'll do the same to sticker pinch and naughty dog next?

@Octane I wasn't sure if that was ever actually confirmed for a PS5 release, or if its exclusivity was more of a non-committal thing, like it turned out to be with Ori and Cuphead.

I won't play it at launch, but seeing as how it'll likely be going to PC GamePass, I'll be inclined to try it out once I build my new rig.

@BlueOcean In that case I'm not sure how I feel about it. Because it is an enormous acquisition. They're not even timed exclusives in that case, just straight up exclusive. We're inching slowly to a conglomerate-ruled industry the way this is going. The same as the film industry. And I don't like it. I fear that this is just going to force Sony to respond with a similar big acquisition, or more timed exclusive games.

@NEStalgia Eh. I don't know. Even after playing All-Stars, I can say that I prefer to play all three games on their original hardware. It just doesn't feel right on Switch. These recent years I've gotten the games I wanted day one, so I don't see any reason to go back to older games when I can barely keep up with new releases. It's just not something I'm personally interested in. It's definitely not in my mind when buying a console.

@BruceCM I really hope it's going to live up to the expectations.

What are your expectations for it, @Octane ....?

@Octane I'm still not sure the Bethesda buyout was really about Sony at all. From Phils statements and generally what we're seeing happen in the industry, I think Microsoft is at the point of swatting at Sony as an annoying fly the same way Sony swats at Nintendo. The last gen MS was so behind at the start, but that was different leadership with different goals, and XBox wasn't even a division of the company, it was part of the Windows team that really didn't care about it. Now that it's a division with a full scale budget as a full division of the behemoth, they're on a very different playing field. I think at this point they can see Sony's a dying dinosaur that has to carve a niche like Nintendo, and they're digging in for the long game of defending local processing devices against the media-service streaming megacompanies. And in that, it's more about defending PC gaming via XBox against GoogAzonBook & Tencent feat. Xi. Sony and Nintendo benefit from their battle, but they're far behind the front lines. I'm not sure that means Bethesda games go to Playstation or not, but I don't think Playstation is the real factor in the acquisition, and I don't think Sony needs to particularly respond to that (though it's Sony, they will vindictively try, it's their corporate culture. Playstation exists at all because of that and the failed Nintendo collab.) This is about consolidating the mega franchises to have more leverage against Stadia, Luna, and the dozen other "Netflix of gaming" services.

I'm not worried about Sony consolidating too many more studios. They simply don't have the money for that, and they're already whining about not having enough money for what they already have. I'm more worried about the studio consolidation when Amazon decides to counter by buying WB and Google makes a run for Ubisoft, Disney takes EA, and all the small studios fold into those at rapid pace, and we end up with a Disney+ situation where if you want to play Assassin's Creed you subscribe to the Google plan, and if you want to play Fallout you subscribe to xCloud, and if you want to play GTA you subscribe to Google, and if you have Comcast as your ISP you can get 2 of the 3 for a bundle of only $23.99+taxes built into your internet bill. I have the same fear as you about the structure, but I don't think that factors into Playstation at all. Of course they already are a movie studio, so does SIE/WW get rolled into part of Columbia-Tristar and share a budget for even more big celebrity based games and film tie-in games? Probably. The new robber barons getting into gaming is the thing I've been dreading for years. Amazon and google turn everything they touch into poo. But I don't think MS and Bethesda are a catalyst for it - I think it's a preemptive defensive move. I think the other moves are going to be bigger and $7.5 will look like chump changes ones the 100+bn transactions start flying. But don't worry, like internet providers and brick and mortar retailers, we'll still have 3 options to pick from for video game providers, so Americans will be happy!

Cyberpunk....I have low expectations. So much hype that can't be met. Crunch development now. Next gen patch not at launch. It doesn't feel ready, but maybe in a year it will be amazing. I'm not buying at launch....I don't really want to play it without the next gen patch. And it'll be on sales by then.

@Octane Also, I suppose it adds more to the "backlog gamer" - if you buy a game to play it when you buy it, I guess I can see not wanting to go back to old games...kind of. If you buy tons of stuff you're interested in when it's on sales, you have a huge library you already own of things you haven't delved into yet. If I bought a Series X and not a single game for the next 7 years, I'd still have dozens of games I REALLY want to play, and tons that I have some interest in, and they'll all be better on my new box than they were on my old box. And if I play them 10 years from now they'll be better still on the box I get after that.

Just like with PC.

Can't do that with PS. Might as well not buy a new box if doing that. You can say "cheapskate, don't buy on sales and pay full price in stead and you won't have that situation!" But....I've "cheaply" spent many hundreds, if not thousants on that library. Buying one at a time I'd have spent less in the respective stores. I get more value...and spend more money with the XBox way. I get less value and therefore spend less money the PS way.

Again, I came from the PC world after the 16bit console world. I bought a copy of Baldur's Gate in 1998 or so. I can still play that copy of Baldur's Gate. And it's enhanced by the new hardware where it was a stuttery choppy mess at the time. Same for Quake, Doom, C&C, AoE, Starcraft 1, 2, everything else. The idea tha console doesn't work that way because it's clung to ancient business models that were built around the idea of games being daughterboards rather than software makes no sense to me. Now XBox works that way..... so PS and Nintendo feel like real dinosaurs. For Nintendo it adds to the charm, because they're always like going back to the 80s. Sony was never about 90s charm.

EDIT: Then there's "old games" - like the JRPGs on X1 and X360 that I never had or realized existed. If this were PS, they'd be gone, or re-sold for more money in the digital store. On XBox, you just......buy them. Blue Dragon, Lost Odyssey etc. Games that shouldn't be dead because they're "old."

Heck the industry just released the whole old FF collection on all platforms....the Mana series on Nintendo...and the world rejoiced. It seems lots of people love playing old games. Even PS fans. Go figure...

@NEStalgia Yeah, maybe. But didn't they have something called Boost Mode for the PS5? If so, they just need to communicate that.

Three options is indeed more than two. You sure you folks can handle that?

@BruceCM Well, the things that were promised in the trailer. They make it sound like you can explore everything, have full choice what to do, etc. But I wonder, can you just kill a random NPC? How about an NPC tied to a quest?

@Octane Yeah we keep hearing rumors on, rumors off, about boost mode. It would be nice if it handled that, however, I'm not sure it's going to be meaningful. For example XBox is working on removing the frame caps automatically in games, no patch required. And that kind of feature set has been part of their program for years now for newer games. For PS, boost mode, at best, just unlocks the hardware outside its power profile so that if the hardware was the only limitation holding a game back it won't hold it back as much anymore, but as 30fps game doesn't unlock to 60. And to get 60fps they want to sell you the game again (Spiderman.) XB is working on automatically unlocking all 360 games to 60fps, and a majority of X1 games weren't locked to begin with at least newer ones post X1X, plus the additional processing enhancements their adding. PS's BC without boost mode would just be punishing and backward. If they add boost mode, that's a "bare minimum at best" effort. Part of that is because of not having had a real plan or policy before. Where MS was discouraging frame caps in games for years, Sony's been rolling with tried & true. But they didn't have a plan in place for a BC progression. You could say, because they don't care, because "gamers don't care about old games." But mostly it's a lack of vision and a lack of understanding the x86 conversion. They could have looked at their partner vendors (EA, Ubisoft, etc) own digital stores for PC to see how they make and sell games. But they still turned inward to their own old ways. That's the karma that's biting them now. Not just current iffy decisions, but those decisions are realizing they've been off the narrative for years in advance.

I'll like my Great White Box. I'm still excited for it. I'll have some games I will remember on it, and that's what matters....and I'm hoping VR gets updates without paying for everything again. Then again, Skyrim was one of the games I hoped the most for. C'mon Microsoft, make my Playstation great! But it's still a box to buy only the things I can't get on the other, better box and not much more than that. If it would enhance my old games I've yet to play, I'd be much more excited, as I am with X. If they would stop trying to sell me barely visible enhancement patches as "remasters" I could even publicly admit I bought one....

But PS is definitely doing everything the "wrong" way with regards to digital library ownership and the whole ecosystem of a digital library. And it was clear they were going to do it all wrong years ago. They're really faling hard in the digital space, and it doesn't translate well in the physical space either, since they're treating consoles and discs like it's the 90's still. They had one job: Don't copy Nintendo.

I'd expect there to be some exceptions, for essential npcs, at least, @Octane .... I hadn't heard them saying you could do absolutely anything at all, though? Then, there'd be various requirements for some options, too, including those relating to background I'm planning to try the no violence approach, just to find out if you really can finish the game without killing anyone, personally! That might take a few tries, finding out just what you can do otherwise & how to do it all
Then, I might go for the slaughter everybody approach after that, too, to see how that works

@BruceCM lol. Sounds like me doing stealth in games, only to screw up halfway and go full on Rambo.

But yeah, maybe they didn't say that, but those are my expectations. I told you the game won't live up to it

The idea would be 2 different runs through the game, @Octane .... We'll see how that goes, though

It will be extremely disappointing if, given the amount of freedom and customisation the game has promised, you can't just kill random NPCs. That would be really immersion-breaking.

Whether you can kill all quest-related NPCs is another question. I know some games like Deus Ex do that, but it's also a completely acceptable compromise if you can't.