Scorpio / Xbox One X

[Candy Arse]

Well you've got the Microsoft and Xbox branding, that's pretty important to some people!

An Xbox pixel is a special pixel. Sure, it might be a 30fps game vs your 60fps+ PC versions, but do you have Xbox pixels?

No you don't. So you're missing out.

[PhoneMonkey]

Such as what? Genuine question because I just see a system with an upgraded GPU and cooling system with an overclocked CPU that was gimped even in 2013. It's like that top heavy gym rat that never does leg day.

I'm still rocking an old Core i5 750 @ 3.8 along with a GTX 970 and that hits 60fps/1080 in almost everything

But as sure as death and taxes, consoles will always be at 30fps with the occasional rare exception. As long as people play screenshots and not games, marketing will always win on this.

[Madmya]

Such as what? Genuine question because I just see a system with an upgraded GPU and cooling system with an overclocked CPU that was gimped even in 2013. It's like that top heavy gym rat that never does leg day.

Whatever the developer desires. I'd imagine it's like playing a PC game with normal graphics settings versus ultra settings - the changes are not simply resolution-related. For example, Gears of War 4:

Gears of War 4 will support native 4K resolution, high-dynamic range lighting (if you have a television that offers that feature), high-resolution textures, higher polygon count rendering and longer draw distance, as well as full dynamic shadows and improved reflections. But not all of the changes are visual, according to Rayner. The update also adds Dolby ATMOS 7.1.4 audio support (if your sound setup supports it), which also works if you’re using compatible headphones.

We saw Forza 7, we saw Anthem, I'm willing to bet the house those games are going to be pared back in more ways than just resolution/fps for their respective versions on bone.

Then there's backwards compatibility - I can't see why 360 games won't run better on XeroX than the Bone.

[Rorschach]

Whatever the developer desires. I'd imagine it's like playing a PC game with normal graphics settings versus ultra settings - the changes are not simply resolution-related.

The majority of the time it is though. Most people I know always try to maintain framerates at the cost of detail/resolution. I know a friend with an older card who prefers gaming at 1080p/60fps, the trade off being low detail on all settings. Game still looks good, just not as good.

The Gears 4 example doesn't bear out, sound fidelity is another thing entirely and not really as important to what's on the screen. And seriously, if you can afford a 4K TV with OLED, quantum dot, HDR, 10-bit colour depth AND a Dolby ATMOS system, why on earth would you hook an Xbox One X up to it? That kind of person would be rocking at least a 1080Ti system to take the most advantage of that panel

The one thing that confuses me most about the Xbox One X is who is the customer segment is it targeting? The argument that PC gaming has a higher entry point no longer exists with the presence of this console. An Xbox One X paired with a 4K TV that has all the bells and whistles is up around $2300 (and that's looking at the cheapest TV from a half decent brand off Harvey Norman), provided you don't already own the TV. Sure, once TV hit the sub-$1000 mark (leaving out Chinese made junk here) and the Xbox One X gets a price drop then yeah, I can see it being a worthy purchase.

[Madmya]

The Gears 4 example doesn't bear out, sound fidelity is another thing entirely and not really as important to what's on the screen. And seriously, if you can afford a 4K TV with OLED, quantum dot, HDR, 10-bit colour depth AND a Dolby ATMOS system, why on earth would you hook an Xbox One X up to it? That kind of person would be rocking at least a 1080Ti system to take the most advantage of that panel

Come on man, did you intentionally ignore everything else in that paragraph or is it me that is missing something?

The one thing that confuses me most about the Xbox One X is who is the customer segment is it targeting? The argument that PC gaming has a higher entry point no longer exists with the existence of this console. An Xbox One X paired with a 4K TV that has all the bells and whistles is up around $2300 (and that's looking at the cheapest TV from a half decent brand off Harvey Norman), provided you don't already own the TV. Sure, once TV hit the sub-$1000 mark (leaving out Chinese made junk here) and the Xbox One X gets a price drop then yeah, I can see it being a worthy purchase.

Extremely strange to bundle in the price of a 4K TV in with the BonEX. Do you count the cost of a 4K monitor in with a PC purchase?

[Rorschach]

Come on man, did you intentionally ignore everything else in that paragraph or is it me that is missing something?

Gears of War 4 will support native 4K resolution, high-dynamic range lighting (if you have a television that offers that feature), high-resolution textures, higher polygon count rendering and longer draw distance, as well as full dynamic shadows and improved reflections. But not all of the changes are visual, according to Rayner. The update also adds Dolby ATMOS 7.1.4 audio support (if your sound setup supports it), which also works if you’re using compatible headphones.

That's what you quoted right? I see 4K, HDR, high res textures, higher poly count rendering, dynamic shadows and improved reflections mentioned. And then he mentions ATMOS audio. Everything but the audio part reads detail and resolution to me. Did I miss something? Not being facetious, but that's what I was responding to.

Extremely strange to bundle in the price of a 4K TV in with the BonEX.

Why is it strange? Why would anyone buy an Xbox One X to play on a 1080p TV if detail is king and games remain 30fps locked? Half the reason I'm not bothering with the PS4 Pro is because I don't own a 4K and probably won't for some years until the prices come down.

Do you count the cost of a 4K monitor in with a PC purchase?

For the sake of argument, of course you would factor it into your purchase.

Edit - Just removed part of the last comment because it didn't bear into the conversation.

[Jasper]

This thread is gold. Brokenhearted xbots aplenty....

[Rorschach]

Anyway, don't get me wrong Madmya. I like the Xbox eco-system and I want to see MS kick Sony in the nuts to promote competition. Just for me, the more I think about getting one the more I realise it's not for me at the moment given my level of investment now in Steam and the PC platform. If, somehow, I end up with a 4K TV in the near future I would probably snap up a Pro and X.

[Madmya]

That's what you quoted right? I see 4K, HDR, high res textures, higher poly count rendering, dynamic shadows and improved reflections mentioned. And then he mentions ATMOS audio. Everything but the audio part reads detail and resolution to me. Did I miss something? Not being facetious, but that's what I was responding to.

I'm definitely no expert in this area, but I'm pretty sure HDR, higher res textures, higher poly count, shadows, reflections, whatever other effect you can think of is not things that magically happen with a resolution increase.

Extremely strange to bundle in the price of a 4K TV in with the BonEX.

Why is it strange? Why would anyone buy an Xbox One X to play on a 1080p TV if detail is king and games remain 30fps locked? Half the reason I'm not bothering with the PS4 Pro is because I don't own a 4K and probably won't for some years until the prices come down.

I say that simply because a 4K TV is generally not exclusively used for a console. Unless you're well off, it's probably the main TV of the household and has many other uses. There will be noticeable benefits if you owned a XeroX on a 1080p TV, it may not be as pronounced, but again I'd be willing to bet the house a BoneX game on a 1080p TV will still be better than a Bone game at 1080p.

And again, 4K is not mandatory. It's completely up to the dev to decide how they use the extra grunt. 4K will probably be the easiest option if the game is expected to run on the bone though.

[Madmya]

Anyway, don't get me wrong Madmya. I like the Xbox eco-system and I want to see MS kick Sony in the nuts to promote competition. Just for me, the more I think about getting one the more I realise it's not for me at the moment given my level of investment now in Steam and the PC platform. If, somehow, I end up with a 4K TV in the near future I would probably snap up a Pro and X.

I totally get how this looks a lot less attractive to those who are invested in PC gaming.

[unfnknblvbl]

Ok, so now I'm straight, this thread makes a little more sense. At first I thought it was looking fun at the Switch for not having its own thread, so therefore worthless.

Right.

So, as a PC gamer, AND an xbot, I'm pretty excited about the Xbox: Recursive Acronym Edition. It does some pretty amazing things, if the hype is to be believed. I do think MS have missed a trick by not calling it a whole new generation, but I think we have Sony to blame for that. If they called the PS4 Pro "PS5" then that might have forced Microsoft's hand a bit on that front.

If we look at it as a whole new generation, then it's simultaneously exciting and disappointing. When has any new generation of console been able to play all the previous generation's games with improvements to closer match the developer's vision? Did the PS2 do that to PSX games, even?
The disappointment for the new gen aspect is that it's not exactly a huge leap over the bone. Or at least, it doesn't seem that, going by the numbers.

As a mid-cycle refresh though, it's a tough sell. Are there going to be Recursive Acronym-only games later down the track? Why should developers target this new niche machine? Why should gamers bother, if MS are going to keep letting their best assets go (Bungie, Bizarre, et al), and then release their biggest exclusive titles on PC anyway?

I like the idea of underperforming games being able to pick up to their optimal condition on the new hardware with no effort from the devs. It's a bit like running Crysis on your new PC just to see how it goes compared to your rig from five years ago. To be honest, that's about the thing I find the most exciting. Bugger 4K, give me a steady framerate.

[Candy Arse]

Anyway, don't get me wrong Madmya. I like the Xbox eco-system and I want to see MS kick Sony in the nuts to promote competition. Just for me, the more I think about getting one the more I realise it's not for me at the moment given my level of investment now in Steam and the PC platform. If, somehow, I end up with a 4K TV in the near future I would probably snap up a Pro and X.

Or you'd just run your PC out to the TV?

I copped a 4k HDR TV last week in preparation for my under-construction gaming room. Looking forward to finding out what my 1080i can do when connected to such a display.

Madmya has also nailed it - heavily invested in PC = no need for XBONEX.

No PC = choice between XBONEX and PS4 Pro.

[Ambrose Burnside]

Can the developers really use the extra power for 60fps if they so choose though?

As it turns out, a platform does exist that both offers more power and lets you choose how to use it: the PC. And if there are any PC gamers out there who attempt to run games at 4K, 30 frames a second, and with Xbox One levels of graphical detail, well, I’m yet to meet them. In my experience, most players on PC consider 60fps table stakes and will tweak settings like texture resolution and shadow quality in order to achieve it — or even higher frame rates.

I’m one of them, and I actually had to make this choice a couple of months ago when shopping for a new monitor. (As an aside, it’s really hard to find good PC monitors!) I’d narrowed it down to two options, seemingly the only 27-inch IPS G-Sync models available in Japan: Asus’ PG279Q and PG27AQ. They are more or less identical products, but the former is 2560x1440 at 144Hz (“overclockable” to 165Hz) and the latter is 4K at 60Hz. My PC is powerful enough to play games at 4K, but I ended up going for the 1440p model.

To some degree, Microsoft and Sony have been restricted by their original console designs. Both new systems are still built around low-power Jaguar CPU cores, originally used in mid-range laptops, and while the Pro and X’s boosted GPUs are helpful for rendering higher resolutions, the relatively weedy CPUs are likely to limit the degree to which framerates can be increased. On a TV, you’d have to hit a solid 60fps if you wanted to avoid torn frames above 30Hz, and that may be a stretch for many games even on the Xbox One X. Could Sony and Microsoft have made more fundamental improvements to their CPUs as well? Maybe, but almost certainly not without significant implications for compatibility.

But that’s not to say that 4K is the only way to improve visuals. PC games at 1080p look much better than PS4 and Xbox One games, owing to the better effects made possible by more powerful GPUs. And even if you do have a 4K TV, the biggest difference you’ll see will come from HDR, not resolution — a feature already possible on the cheaper Xbox One S and regular PS4. The PS4 Pro at least has a good reason to push more pixels if you own a PlayStation VR headset, where the extra resolution really can make a tangible difference to image quality, but this E3 Microsoft downplayed the prospects of VR on its console platform.

To be clear, neither Microsoft nor Sony are mandating that developers work on 4K output — studios are free to use the extra power to deliver better 1080p performance if that’s what they want to do. But the design and positioning of these systems makes it a lot easier and more desirable to concentrate on resolution at the expense of all else. It’ll be riskier and probably more time-consuming to work on a pristine 1080p Xbox One X release when Microsoft has pushed the “native 4K” message so strongly, even if ultimately it would make a more noticeable difference to consumers.

I hope one day we see the PlayStation 5 and Xbox Two come out with designs that focus on performance, not pixels. Until then, though, I think I’m going to be getting a lot more use out of my PC.

4K is the wrong target for Xbox One X and PS4 Pro

[Madmya]

Can the developers really use the extra power for 60fps if they so choose though?

To be clear, neither Microsoft nor Sony are mandating that developers work on 4K output — studios are free to use the extra power to deliver better 1080p performance if that’s what they want to do.

Yes.

[GameHED]

The only reason MS made this thing is to say to sony "we can have a 4K support console too". The original PS4 and XBone were underpowered so this is just a answer to the problem of people getting angry that they couldn't get the 1080P at 60FPS as standard in games.

Now developers can make the 1080P games at higher framerates if they wish like Nioh.

God you guys are stupid. The reason they are pushing the 4K thing is because of the TVs being 4K but most developers know if the game is going to chug they will go for high framerate or lower the detail in-game to keep the framerate consistent.

With PC developers they NEVER code the game to keep a framerate consistent because it is not a closed platform and they can't tell what the people who are playing their game on, have in advance.

This is the advantage of consoles: you have limited choice in what specs exist so the developers have more control over what they put in the game before release. Eg if the open world game has way too many effects turned on, which causes the game to go down to 20FPS in the busiest part of the game, then they can test for this in advance of release and lower the amount of objects, people and other things in that spot to make sure the framerate can get back to consistent 30fps. (console gamers are much more quality conscious in getting consistent frmaerates than having the pretty graphics as this is gameplay-related and PC guys just play whatever game looks good) But on PC, if only a small portion of people complain, the developers who made the game will just leave it alone and expect you to tweak your settings which results in games that don't look as good as they they do on the back of the box. This happened to the Witcher 3 where in order to get the open world, they made the game ugly to ensure console peasants could get consistent frames per second in exchange for big open environment and this cost the game nice graphics.


If you are making open world games you need to get used to more choppy experiences if it is a slow paced rpg game. If it's a racing game, then yeah having the 60fps is going to be far more important. With consoles you are getting decent power at ok price. The PC guy gets better power but they lose out on the game being on a closed platform.

On a closed platform the developers tend to tweak the game to fit the specs more. (very important as this is part of the quality control imo) But on PC it is assumed that as soon as you get chuggy framerate, you should upgrade which is the one thing that annoys the lazy guy who hates doing this. They would rather a generation last a specific amount of time not play old games at high framerates. Console gamers want NEW GAMES, not old games they beat 5 years ago with new improved graphics. (unless it was a classic title like a Zelda or Last of Us or something notable)

MS fucked up with Xbox ONE and this machine's appeal is the ability to play old shit with better graphics. The developers need to compensate for Sony and MS fuck up this gen by custom designing the game to run at different settings.
Sony is already rumoured to be working on the PS5 already so if MS doesn't release the Fixed Bone (XBOX ONE X) they will looking weaker. It's about perception. You see, if they don't hurry up, the XBox One X will be compared to the PS5 and not the PS 4 Pro! The timing has to be just right. Xbox One X is like comparing new 3DS/XL to old 3DS/XL. It's still part of this generation.

And MS is playing the long game: make consoles that have PC-like backwards-compatibility so they don't have to release "HD Remasters" which is time better spent working on bigger and better new games. For the early life of PS4 we saw a lot of Remastered old games. The goal I think is MS want to move away from this, to more PC-like thing where your old shit just works on the new shit. It's a bloody good idea and works if you play old games and know they didn't sell well enough to get remastered.

This is the plan nintendo needs to follow because older games can still be resold to NEWER YOUNGER GENERATION OF PEOPLE. Every time nintendo or Sony release a new machine, you need the old console to play the old games unless they have emulated it perfectly and put it on Eshop.

Wouldn't it be great if you could play any old game on any new machine? (or buy that game digitally from their shop and it works perfectly (not emulated version of it) The current system we have right now is that we are at the mercy of the online eshop to release the emulated version of the game, and as we all know, not every game you like is going to go on the digital shop is it? But if you own the game, it would be good to just play it and it works on the current generation or at least buy it from the digital store (because the console is backward compatible with all previous generations) and play it without having to get out the old console that the game was originally released on. This is a long term strategy to solving the problem of long console cycles which means you are stuck with ugly graphics for a long time because that's just what we were used to.

MS strategy will pay off in the long run. People want to be able to play the old games on the current systems hassle-free. There is no need to find a second hand old dreamcast just to play soul calibur. No need to make remaster of the game which may have undesirable changes made to it. Instead it just runs on the machine you have now. I can see the appeal in this for people who think the current game of today are worse than the old games of the past. *COUGH* all new Bioware RPGs *COUGH* This will save a lot of time so the developers can use their talents to make whole NEW games on new systems instead of re-releasing HD Remasters of old shit. I want to play Morrowind on console again but don't have my old Xbox anymore. I should be able to play it on current console again to relive memories. PC does this already but something like this should exist for console too. (PC is still pirate territory and developers can't make nearly as much money on that open platform as consoles) Sony and Nintendo will probably end up copying Microsoft in the future I predict.

[Ambrose Burnside]

We'll see. It's interesting that those that can actually choose (PC gamers) will always choose framerate over resolution (if they have to make that sacrifice, I have a beefy PC but always aim for a minimum of 60fps over extra detail when I have to) yet Sony and Microsoft are pushing a resolution that hardly anyone can enjoy over the option that offers the best gameplay experience for everyone. Especially when:

And even if you do have a 4K TV, the biggest difference you’ll see will come from HDR, not resolution — a feature already possible on the cheaper Xbox One S and regular PS4.

Hopefully gamers win the argument, and not marketing people. I'm not holding my breath on console-only gamers knowing what they're missing though.

Still can't believe these consoles are running on laptop CPUs that were only midrange to begin with

[Mavy]

Watched a Digital Foundry video suggesting that more PC titles should utilise scaling to hit 4k on lower spec'd cards much like PS4Pro does. Makes a lot of sense really though probably eats into much of the reason why Nvidia and AMD keep pumping out the next best thing out so quickly. People may not upgrade so regularly then.

[Froggy]

I'm all in to, it's only $650 bucks and I think we will see better games coming out on this over time then people are expecting. I'm with Madmya plus why not a PC, xbox and ps4? Then you just don't care for arguments...

[Replica]

I'm all in to, it's only $650 bucks and I think we will see better games coming out on this over time then people are expecting. I'm with Madmya plus why not a PC, xbox and ps4? Then you just don't care for arguments...

I find the whole PC elitist thing pretty sad on this forum and it genuinely turns me off wanting to post here more often. Each system has it's merits and great games. Personally I am looking forward to getting my hands on a One X. It will sit quite comfortably in my living room while my PC can stay in the study. After a shitty week working in IT the last thing you want to do is switch on a PC.

[t0mby]

I'm all in to, it's only $650 bucks and I think we will see better games coming out on this over time then people are expecting. I'm with Madmya plus why not a PC, xbox and ps4? Then you just don't care for arguments...

I find the whole PC elitist thing pretty sad on this forum and it genuinely turns me off wanting to post here more often. Each system has it's merits and great games.

Dont worry too much about it, they just need to justify the price of their rigs and cost of upgrading their graphics cards every year or two. Real gamers are happy with whatever console they're playing on except Jasper cos there's fuck all to play on Switch.

[Rorschach]

The best gaming experience is now on the PC, sad to say. It used to be console to be sure, right up until the 360. Since then you can get better looking, cheaper versions of anything on the consoles barring the odd first party game (which doesn't really apply to Xbox anymore), online gameplay is free and there is more diversity on the PC. You don't need to spend a lot on parts anymore either to do it. I don't consider myself an elitest at all, I've always gone where the best experience was for me and since the beginning of this generation it's well and truly PC.

[unfnknblvbl]

I agree. My PC is far from high end, but I enjoy gaming on it more than I do on my 'bone because it's less of a fuckaround. I never thought I'd ever say that about PC vs Consoles, but Microsoft has made that happen, against all odds.
Trying to play a game on the 'bone if you haven't played in a while is the most infuriating experience ever.

[Candy Arse]

I'm all in to, it's only $650 bucks and I think we will see better games coming out on this over time then people are expecting. I'm with Madmya plus why not a PC, xbox and ps4? Then you just don't care for arguments...

I find the whole PC elitist thing pretty sad on this forum and it genuinely turns me off wanting to post here more often. Each system has it's merits and great games.

Dont worry too much about it, they just need to justify the price of their rigs and cost of upgrading their graphics cards every year or two. Real gamers are happy with whatever console they're playing on except Jasper cos there's fuck all to play on Switch.

Everything involved in a PC setup is justified the moment you compare it to a console version - assuming you want the best possible gaming experience.

If you don't care, it's irrelevant.

[Madmya]

Exciting times.

[Jasper]

NOBODY CARES for the simple fact that EVERY SINGLE MOTHER FUCKING MUST HAVE Xbox One X game will be available on PC with SUPERIOR graphics, SUPERIOR resolution, SUPERIOR frame-rate, SUPERIOR (and free unlike XBL) online experience...and all at a CHEAPER price as PC games are more affordable than console games!

As previously stated, there's something truly mentally wrong with you - if you intend to purchase an Xbox One X knowing you are paying MORE MONEY for an INFERIOR gaming experience, when you can instead spend LESS MONEY for a SUPERIOR gaming experience on PC!

If you still don't get what i'm saying..skip the XB1X, skip upgrading your PC...and use your money to GO SEE A FUCKING PSYCHIATRIST YOU SICK IN THE HEAD MENTALLY ILL RETARDS!!!