Topic: Official Push Square Xbox Thread

@BlueOcean Certainly all of Xbox games will be running on Windows 10 and built to deliver the full 4k experience. Therefore it should be relatively easy to port those to the Xbox One X and down grade to the lowest console in the specs. Its not that different from those Devs listing the minimum required PC specs but in this case, they know the XB1 is the minimum and optimising the settings for that - similar to adjusting the settings on PC manually by gamers to optimise for their specs.

I am only speculating about how MS could move forward in a 'generation-less format. At E3 last year, there was talk of VR for example, that disappeared - partly I think because it was a 'grey' area - something the X has but the S doesn't. MS then spun that to say VR wasn't viewed the same yet of course it was still adding 'games' and the possibility of bonus features, missions etc in VR that standard XB1 users cannot access. Games like RE7 and RotTR had 'pro' enhancements that 'enhanced' the VR too, but tits not like base PS4 owners couldn't access these too if they wanted. Its not a stretch to see non-VR games also also having differences in content - even an 'exclusive' to 'X' release. Why have 1 rule for VR games and not for all games. The N64 had a few games that were 'enhanced' by the Expansion pack that also had more content (Perfect Dark) and even a 'requirement' to play (DK64, Majoras Mask). Its a 'difficult' position for MS - on the one hand they want to keep parity but on the other they don't want people finding out that there £450 console is limited and restricted by the significantly inferior hardware. I know I would be annoyed if I found out that content my 'X' could comfortably play was 'cut' or not releasing on XB1 because the weaker console can't cope with it. I am not referring to 1st Party Games as MS will tailor these to be native 4k on the X so will scale down to the standard console but the 3rd Party games, the games that, at best have to use checkerboard rendering to achieve a 4k image would struggle to run native 720p on the XB1. I guess the Devs could use CB rendering - like Rainbow Six: Seige - to run on the Standard too. Its speculation because we are not at that point right now and the games releasing would still scale down.

We know that Sony will release its PS5 at some point. The PS4 though also has more 'leeway' in terms of game resolutions. It 'could' drop to 720p for example but if a game like SW:BF2 had to run at 720p on the base PS4, what resolution would the XB1 have? The last SW:BF ran at 720p on XB1 anyway so it really doesn't have much room to cope with more demanding games. Again speculation - we may not see this situation occurring - not before MS decide what they are going to do. Sony could well have a PS5 out by that point and those type games could just get a PS5 release for example. Would MS allow them to release just to the 'X'? Will they bring out a 'new' generation to avoid that? Will we see disclaimers on the box - like Xbox X recommended or minimum required?

On the one hand, MS are talking about a 'generation-less' future but on the other hand, they are talking about the 'X' and 'named it' to lock it into this generation. In the PC market, the market they are trying to emulate, at some point, your current GPU will need to be upgraded to keep playing the latest games. Upgrading doesn't eliminate access to your game library either. So what will MS do? Like I said they could bring out an 'upgraded' console every 3-4yrs, like replacing your GPU every 3-4yrs on PC and phase out the weakest system. There would always be 2 specs on the market - the 'low' and 'highest' spec so no console ever gets 'exclusive' content. By the time a game 'can't' run on base XB1 for example, the 'X' is the 'minimum' standard and MS has a more powerful console on the market. The 'X' running the game at CB1800p for example but the 'newer' one running it at native 4k.

I really don't know how MS view the future and what they intend to do. To me though, they are giving mixed messages and the naming of the 'X' does seem to put it in the XB1 generation. I would feel quite annoyed if in 2-3yrs MS were to bring out a 'new' generation and that 'some' games are not released on XB1 (like we see with every new generation) even though they 'could' run on the X. Its significantly more powerful than the Pro - not just GPU but the RAM too for the 4K textures so the Pro has some clear areas that a PS5 could offer a 'tangible' reason to upgrade. The X on the other hand already offers enough RAM for 4k Assets, 4k HDR Bluray player, Atmos and Game VRR, delivering 4k (not 1080-1440 or CB1800p - like the Pro) so its not like they can 'upgrade' enough components to make it feel like a 'new' generation. CPU and GPU could be upgraded to offer more native 4k and higher (maybe even above 60fps with HFR TV's) but it looks like the 'X' will have HDMI2.1 upgrade soon anyway. I can't see MS going for or needing to use a 24tflop GPU (4x over the X) and a 8core, dual thread CPU clocked at 4.5ghz, 24GB of HBM2 RAM (or better) as well as an 8k HDR Bluray Player or something like these - just to make a 'significant' 'next' gen upgrade. This would still be less of a 'jump' up from the XB1x than the XB360/PS3 era was to the current generation. If we go for an ~8x jump from the base XB1, that's still less than a 2x jump from the XB1x and less of a 'step' up in general than the Pro was to the PS4. As you can see, this puts MS in a difficult position. They can't really make a 'new' generation that is a 'significant' generational jump from the 'X' but they can't expect to keep parity with the XB1s either and keep those that spent 'big' on the X happy either. The most realistic option appears to be bringing out an 'upgraded' console every 3-5yrs (most likely every 4yrs unless there is a 'need' to release either sooner or later) and phase out the weakest. They cannot realistically make the same technological jump in specs that we have seen in previous generations but a ~2-4x jump every 4 years or so is achievable and could be similar in essence to just buying a new GPU every 3-4yrs to keep playing games at a 'consistent' or better level. It would also allow them to be flexible too - react to new technology - like VR/AR or display changes like 4k HDR that we have seen this gen - rather than be locked into a spec for 5yrs+. Its not even 4yrs since the XB1/PS4 launched yet in that time, we have seen a number of technological jumps - certainly in Displays - which is partly why Sony and MS have had to build iterative hardware to offer 4k HDR to match the quality of the displays. I know some may be on 1080p TV's but more and more are upgrading - either through choice or because their HD TV is in need of replacing. I have owned a 4k TV for over 3yrs now so its great for me to actually have a console capable of delivering this too. Also games have been made to 4k standards for longer than the PS4/XB1 has been around - BF4, a launch title on these, could be played at 4k on PC if you had the hardware. DF often use Crysis 3 as a 4k test game too so its not 'new' to gaming - but its taken Consoles years to catch up. Well in truth, its taken years for the hardware to both drop in price and become sufficiently 'small', economic to run without generating masses of heat to dissipate and 'suitable' for use in a 'small' plastic box. Of course Sony and MS could have tried to hold out another year or two, get to the 5/6yr anniversary and bring out a new gen specifically built for 4k. No different from the XB360/PS3 being built for Widescreen HD. Some thought the 'X' should be a 'next' gen - 4yrs isn't unheard of with MS as that's how long the OG Xbox was and the N64 for that matter before they had new gen replacements. I do think though if MS had done so, a certain portion of the internet would accuse MS of 'failing' with XB1 and moving on...

I see the pre orders of the "normal" One X are open now. It'll be interesting to see how fast they sell.

@crippyd My Game 'email' said they had limited stock so it will be interesting to see if they sell out before launch too...

@BAMozzy I would think that the console will be a good seller for MS, at least I hope it will. I'm certainly looking forward to the launch and seeing the upgrade over my One.

@crippyd It seems better geared towards the 4k era than any other console and for those with 1080p TV's, a noticeable upgrade over the XB1. We all know that the XB1 doesn't offer as many games in the full 1080p so even on 1080p screens, games have a bit more softness to them. Even those in 1080p though on the XB1 can look better too - with higher quality textures etc. Of course those with the latest 4k UHD Premium TV's and/or Atmos Audio set-up's should benefit the most.

I also think MS are better placed to offer newcomers to the family with things like Game Pass and better for those interested in more than just the latest era of games with its Backwards Compatibility.

I do find it funny that now the 'X' is about to launch, with a much more significant difference than the gap between XB1 and PS4, I see a lot of people saying that 'power and visuals' don't matter as much as 'exclusives' - reminds me of the things Xbox fanboys were saying 4yrs ago when the Sony fanboys were saying 'enjoy those games at 900p LMAO' and that they buy more multi-platform games anyway so they are getting the 'best'. I don't care either way as I have a Pro so I can pick whether I want the best looking/playing games or the version that may have extra/timed content but visually almost 'last' gen by comparison. I know that may sound 'insulting' to Pro owners, calling their console almost last 'gen' by comparison but its averaging around 1440p (CB 1800 is a little lower pixel count and CB 2160 a little higher) and using 1080p quality assets/textures. That would be like the last gen '720p' either using CB 900p (2x450p) or CB1080p (2x540p) with 540p textures compared to a 1080p console with 1080p textures, like a DVD vs Bluray quality player. Now if that isn't 'last' gen what is?

I must admit I am still a bit 'disappointed' with MS's approach. Whilst its great that, at least for the moment, all XB1 games/peripherals etc work across both, it doesn't fill me with confidence that my 'X' experience will be optimised and could be 'relatively' short-lived. I can't see how MS can think their XB1 is at its 'half-way' point 4yrs into the generation when its obviously not even built to deliver the full HD experience. Had MS 'not' released the 'X' this year, I don't think anyone would have been 'surprised' if MS released a next gen Xbox for the 4k era. It wouldn't have been too early after 4yrs if you look at the OG Xbox and when MS released its 360 (incidentally that was 4yrs after). MS probably could have held off another year at most but with many AAA games increasingly running at 720-900p, with lower and lower visual setting qualities, I find it hard to see how it could last another 2yrs let alone 3-4yrs. Will MS turn around to EA or Activision and say they 'can't' release a game on XB1 because they can't get it running at a 'reasonable' level when it would work perfectly well on the 'X'? I don't think 1st Party games will 'struggle' so much as MS do look like they target 1080p on base consoles, built with this in mind but 3rd Party devs are making games on PC's to run with bigger GPU/CPU's and then porting down to console, cutting frame-rates, resolutions, visual settings etc down to run on the limited hardware.

It will be much be much harder for MS, I think, to build a next gen Xbox. They can't exactly offer an 'improved media' - better than 4k HDR, better than 'Atmos' Audio, better than 4k HDR visuals with 4k assets (OK so they may be able to offer 'more' native and less dynamically scaling' games with maybe bit higher visual settings). In fact the only 'area' MS could really offer a tangible upgrade in is frame-rates. More games running at 60fps. Everything else is the same as the 'X' offers and people will rightfully ask, why should I need to upgrade when my 'X' 'should' be powerful enough to run these games? People could ask why they didn't make the X a next Gen and the XB1 essentially a BC option within that rather than lock this 'beast' to the very much weaker XB1. How much will that hold it back? Games that could run at 60, being capped at 30 for example? In the worst case scenarios missing out on content or even whole games because they wont run well on XB1. I guess they could still release on the weaker hardware - much to the annoyance of those still on the console - make them feel like they have to upgrade to actually 'play' the game at decent performance.

Its different to the PS4 - mostly because these are very much closer in terms of hardware specs. A slight tweak on CPU and RAM speeds and an 'extra GPU' bolted on to double resolution - not a 4.3-4.6x boost, with Massive RAM increase and much higher speeds, not a modified CPU to offload much of the workload to other areas to free up room for other tasks, not building in HDMI 2.1 features before 2.1 even launches. If Sony turned round and said 'X' game won't be coming to PS4 (and therefore Pro) because of CPU and RAM limitations, you could 'accept' that much better than MS saying it when their 'X' is clearly far more capable - even if it meant the game had to run at 1080-1440p!

In my mind, with MS saying they are moving away from 'generations', I would think that in 3-4yrs time, when the base XB1 is 7-8yrs old and 4k really has become the 'majority' (I think 4k is at a much higher % amongst gamers than the 'global' average as I can't see many 50+ age ranges bothering to upgrade when their HD TV is adequate for the content they watch Between 20-40 though, I bet the 4k TV is much higher and with gamers/techies and AV enthusiasts - the highest. I have owned 4k for 3yrs+ now), MS would release 'X2' and the base XB1 gradually phased out - much like the 360/PS3 were phased out with 'fewer' big AAA games releasing. In this case though MS stating that the 'X' is the minimum or recommended console and the X2 the 'enhanced/best' version. Essentially the 'X' becoming the XB1 and the X2 the iterative upgrade. 3-4ys later, the 'X', now 7-8yrs old, is slowly phased out, the X2 becomes the 'minimum' and X3 the 'enhanced'. Mirroring the PC market essentially and upgrading a GPU every 3-4yrs. Eventually that 7-8yr old GPU will find fewer games that it meets the 'minimum requirement' for but as soon as you upgrade, your library isn't made obsolete and a lot actually run/look better too.

Its that 'mixed' messaging and long term plan that I am not so pleased with. I am of course attracted to the bigger, better, shinier that MS are offering but on the one hand they are are talking about a generation free future and 'borrowing' the best bits of the PC ecosystem yet on the other calling the 'X' nothing more than a more powerful XB1. They seem to have dropped VR too - the one 'big' grey area - something the more powerful device offered - hardware and games - that would not be offered to base XB1 owners.So much for getting our Fallout 4 VR that E3 2016's reveal mentioned...

Anyway I have rambled enough and could ramble more too. I am still looking forward to my Project Scorpio and will have a lot of games - old and new - that will take advantage of this extra power.

@BAMozzy I think MS are going more for AR rather than VR and I'm not sure how they will be going forward with the new generationless consoles. I think you might be correct in how you see it working with the One being the BC console and X being minimum spec etc. Sam here though, really looking forward to my new console and playing the great games I've been enjoying for the past 10 years or so. I'm really not bothered about console exclusive games as the ones I play tend to be third party any way except for Halo and Gears.

@crippyd I have lost 'faith' in Halo - never really liked the MP so its always been the campaign that drew me in. Gears is a favourite but I was still a bit disappointed with 4 although in fairness, I think the Coalition at least did a better job than 343 have with Halo (so far). Gears 4 looked great in HDR though but not sure I will replay it when the X arrives - maybe a level or two just to compare.

Forza MotorSport has become quite 'boring' in general but I feel that way with 'Sim' racers - not just Forza. Horizon is more 'fun' and varied but saying that, I have pre-ordered 7. Not just because of the visuals but because of the dynamic Weather that I hope changes things up more. I get bored of driving round one circuit, then moving to the next which feels similar to the last (a different combination of bends and straights but the 'same' objective) and then repeat ad-infinitum (or ad-nauseam LOL). I still have a LOT to do with Forza Horizon 3 which I purposefully have not attempted to do a lot knowing the X was coming. I couldn't resist Gears though - especially as I bought the Gears XB1s and that came with the console. I still haven't played much of the co-op/MP or added the DLC that my Season Pass enabled me to do - another thing I could 'check' with the X when I get mine.

I can't say that PUBG, Cuphead, Crackdown 3, State of Decay etc appeal either and like you, even with a PS and their Exclusives, I buy and play a LOT more multi-platform games. In the next 2 months, I have pre-ordered more multi-platform games than I have bought Exclusives in the past 18-24months. I will install the games - like Forza 7, AC: Origins, Wolfenstein 2, Evil within 2 etc on my XB1s External to update to 4k ready for the X. A simple case of plugging in my HDD to the X should enable me to be up and running very quickly on the 7th.

The 'issue' with that system of a rolling 'iterative' upgrade though is 'parity'. We know that the PC isn't necessarily 'fair' with keeping frame-rates 'similar' across the variety of different hardware. If you do get a 'game' (like CoD for example) in that phase when all 3 consoles (the 7-8yr old XB1, the 3-4yr old X and a new iterative 'X2'), would they all run a 'locked' and/or consistent 'equal' frame rate? Say for example the only way the XB1 version runs 'well' enough is at 30fps, would devs have a 'different' capped rate to create a 'smooth' experience for all? Nerf the X and/or X2 to 30fps to keep parity? Maybe just set the 'Cap' at 60fps but know the XB1 won't get above 35fps and would feel erratic? On the PS4/Pro - BF1 is 'capped' at 60fps but in MP game-play, the PS4 can be 15+fps lower in some situations.

You could argue that is an 'advantage' to those with the better console and its a 'loophole' for devs say capping the frame rate at the 'highest' possible so they can say its a '60fps' game even though the base may never reach that in 'active' (i.e not looking at the floor or nose to a wall to reduce the GPU stress). I know say 45fps vs 60fps isn't the same as 30 vs 60 but the way TV's refresh rates work, 45fps can feel worse because its not coinciding with the refresh rate of a TV. 30fps for example means that the 'new' frame always falls on the screen 'refresh' although the screen will refresh 'twice' with the same image because its refreshing at 60 times per second. This is why we see 30 or 60fps games and why a 30fps can feel smoother and better than a 45fps game despite it having a 'higher' fps.

With a 'new' generation, it of course leaves devs 'free' to not worry about parity/fairness. It also leaves manufacturers free to build the console how they wish - no need to worry about the former gen, the players and parity, no need to worry about the old games working on new hardware and vice versa - even free to go to other APU manufacturers and use completely different CPU/GPU architecture that may suit the future games better. The PS5 'CoD' gamers are unlikely to be in the 'same' lobbies as the PS4 gamers so they 'could' have differing frame-rates - even content too. With iterative hardware though, you could end up with the 'N64' situation where some games only work with the upgraded hardware (like DK64, Majoras Mask) or only parts of it are accessible (like Perfect Dark). Its not great for some consumers who may buy 'CoD' at the 'full' price and find out that the Campaign is disabled until you upgrade or worse, buy the 'prestige' edition with Season Pass and find out that the last 3 packs can't be played. On PS3/XB1, CoD BO3 didn't have the campaign, I don't think they sold the Season Pass and I think only the first DLC pack was sold. They couldn't take out the campaign etc because some of those buying may have the upgraded hardware. Maybe by that time, the majority had upgraded to the 'X' or X2 but the minority who still have the OG XB1 would be 'disappointed'

There are Pro's and Cons to both routes of course and it will be interesting to see how things progress. MS could also bring out a 'new' generation Xbox and then all the XB1 software joins the XB360 and OG Xbox Backwards compatibility programme - thus bringing your library forward as they stipulated they would. I do think though that has its 'Pros and Cons' too - how do they handle the situation when a game should run on the X but not releasing on that 'generation' because of the weaker XB1 for example. Still a lot of questions to answer and we may not know these for years. I can't say I will lose sleep over it whilst I enjoy the 4k HDR gaming on the X - but I still can't help thinking about this. If the state of the world continues to decline though, we may not even get to that point... LOL

anyone played the new Minecraft yet, in my opinion it needs some work, the picture seems strange and distorted when you turn and it has a few bugs and the interface isn't as friendly as the other versions

what are your thoughts?

This months Games with Gold - can't say it excites me...

Another 'close' look at Xbox X version and comparing the X Demo with the Pro/PC versions...

After this month's games next month's seems blah. Sad thing is I totally spaced on Hydro Thunder and forgot to lock it in. I hope they offer it again for free at some point, or does anyone know if I can contact MS and maybe get it free. I did have Gold for the time I just forgot to download it.

Anybody getting Cuphead? It's my type of game and I like that 1930's look.

@shonenjump86 I'll be getting it at some point but not tomorrow.

@BAMozzy @Tasuki The GwG do look a bit poor this month, I think the PS+ games look better to my eyes this coming month. Also I don't think you can claim a game once the month has passed.

@crippyd They are not exciting to me but each to their own. I haven't really been enthralled by the XB1's line up for a few month's now - although Forza 5 and Trials Fusion aren't 'bad' games. I admit I am not a fan of MGS and Amnesia doesn't really interest me either but I am still more likely to add both to my collection than these. I still have Rayman Legends on XB1 and MoH: Airbourne wasn't the 'best' when it released 10yrs ago.

Its a good job October is a 'very' busy month for me. Not sure I will play most/all of the games I have pre-ordered until November (If I can resist). Therefore I don't know that I will have time or want to play Octobers 'free' games on either system anyway.

I havrn't played a Forza game before and I prefer more "arcade" racers (outrun, midnight club, need for speed etc.)

Should I try Motorstorm 7 (or 6) or Horizon 3?

@belmont Forza Motorsport (Motorstorm was a fun PS3 arcade racer) is more like Gran Tourismo, Project Cars type of thing. Its difficult to assess whether you should play 7 as that hasn't released yet but it does look like it will be an improvement over 6 with more 'dynamic' weather. Like others in the series though, you have the usual solo progression through a variety of disciplines, the ability to upgrade your car (but be warned, if you put too much into it, your car can jump a class and be ineligible unless you swap some parts out) You can get very technical in setting ride height, tire balance, brake bias etc but if that isn't 'you' or your field of expertise, you can just leave those settings at 'default' and still have fun. Its got multiple degrees of adjusting the difficulty - from providing the full track racing line to just braking line to nothing at all. You can also rewind (or turn that option off entirely), set the AI difficulty etc. The more aids you turn off, the higher the difficulty settings, the bigger the 'bonus' so you can tailor the experience to your ability - maybe just above to push you and earn more credits. It is though, like any other Racing Sim in that you have a range of cars going from 'basic' road going small cars all the way up to supercars, le mans cars and even racing trucks. The principal is still the same though, in that your objective is to drive around tracks, racing other similar cars.

Horizon 3 is a bit more like Burnout Paradise. You can spend all day just driving around 'Australia - not bothering to race. You will come across drivers though that if you want to race on the fly, you can - get from point A to B as fast as possible along roads with 'normal' drivers and you don't necessarily have to stay on the Road either. There are some 'wacky' events - one of the first is to race a Jeep - except that Jeep is dangling from a Helicopter and gets dropped metres from the finishing line... You can set up your own events - select the cars/classes/laps, time of day etc too - whether on or off road. It has jumps and boards to smash, hidden cars (called Barn Finds that if you locate, will be restored and added to your garage. You have customisation etc too.

Personally I prefer Horizon - just because its 'different' where as Motorsport, its virtually the same everytime. OK so the cars and their specs may differ, the tracks differ - even the weather now adds a bit more variety and unpredictability, but the principal is the same - beat other cars to the finish and then rinse/repeat but Horizon, its up to you if you just want to drive, race - even ad-hoc rather than be dictated that this 'car class' and 'track' is 'next' in the season. Its that freedom and variety that Horizon offers that appeals more to me but for others its 'too' casual and 'only 30fps' - although runs smoothly enough...

Anyway hope that helps

@KratosMD @BAMozzy Thanks for the detailed answers my friends. To be fair I don't have an xbox, I haven't even held the controller lol.

After the introduction of the "Play Anywhere" thing I started catching up. I firstly tried Killer Instict and liked it. Now I have sometime off from my "good" PC I use for coding so I wanted to try a Forza game and, for me, Horizon 3 seemed a better choice from what I saw online. Thanks for the help. I will buy look for a cheap digital version of it.

First NBA 2K18 with its 5 GB save file; now Forza 7 with a 50 GB day one patch.
What's next, a 300 GB OS for our consoles?

REALLY! that's as big as an actual game plus what about those of us in areas that don't get high internet speeds even on fiber (it's about 30mbs where i live), it's going to take AGES!

you know if a game has a day one patch that big they should release it on the store instead of as an update and let people download it early so they can ACTUALLY PLAY THE GAME THE BROUGHT!!!

@FullbringIchigo I don't have a XB1 but I remember the 360 let you manage install, DLC and patch files separately. I just have a 7gb/month plan for my phone and it's more then enough for work and daily life. If a game is released broken and with a huge patch then I just wait for the Goty edition. Will I soon have to spend €30 month only to play offline games?!? I know I sound like a 20th century grandpa, but I can happily live with a new game on disc and a new book on paper every month...