I Have No Problem With the Xbox and Xbox 360, the Xbox One is Kind of a Joke Though

Have never had trouble with it, nor do I need to play ps4 from my kitchen, there are quite long cords + the ps4's outlet and hdmi cords are plenty long.

Still waiting on you to highlight the legendary thing. I was listing good games and Yooka Laylee can be considered a good game.

Like I said, "I see you're making shit up. You'll lose credibility if you keep doing that."

You're full of shit, thanks for helping me point it out.

Okay lets break that down. Xbox 360 brought western PC developers over in a bigger way than ever, because Japanese developers wouldn't give it the time of day. MS was also putting a hge effort in with first party as well. But MS was bringing something to market completely different from the 6th gen, they had all these ideas and a great service and they made that work.

Spencer I suppose has done the best with what he's got after they ejected practically all their first party developers. And wasn't in a 'kinect hell hole', they were relegated to it because it's all they're good for. Rare is just a name, like 95% of the talent is gone.

But is you have a PC, what's the point in getting an Xbox One? Play anywhere is good if you're already in the situation of having an Xbox One and Windows PC. Otherwise it's nothing to shout about. Play anywhere isn't going to become something big. Because MS made everything multiplat with the PC, the group of gamers that were PC gamers and Xbox gamers is going to be a struggling market, because those PC gamers know there's no point to buying an Xbox. For the most part, PC gamers want a console that plays different games to their PC. PC gamers are more likely to get a PS4 or Switch at this point. You'll probably get some strays who started out with an Xbox One and moved to the PC. On the one hand MS want to merge the markets of console and PC with their ecosystem, the problem is, they're asking PC gamers to spend a load on a console that will play the same games. If MS want to merge their markets, they need to do their own cheap Steam link for PC gamers, a £30 - £40 Xbox Link or something. That would make sense instead of asking someone to drop £200 to £300 on more hardware to play the same games, that makes no sense.

Everything MS have done is reactionary, from dumping Kinect to catch up in sales, to making all their games multiplat to stretch their reach, to dramatically dropping the price of their console to make it look more appealing. As a day one Xbox One owner, you can just see how much they changed things and how quickly the value dropped. They would never have done these things if their sales were closer to Sony's from the start.

@putaspongeon: lol Haze can be a good game too. Haze must be legendary.

@HalcyonScarlet: PC gamers wouldn't get a PS4 since all PS4 games are on PC.

I see you're reaching for desperate arguments.

BioShockOwnz?

@waahahah said:

Their strategy with the 360 was 3rd party exclusives. Nothing about it was pushing for the best product as it was intentionally designed to invade living rooms which put Sony on their heels that gen.

The xbox 360 had many exclusives it wasn't just about multiplatforms specially on its first 3 or 4 years.

MS didn't put sony on their heels stop taking crap sony mess up with the PS3 and still on its worse performance MS loss to sony and Nintendo as well you people really have a shitty memory if the xbox 360 would have been $600 1 year after the PS3 it would have never sold half of what the PS3 sold.

A testament of how sony was able to change things and this gen show what happen when sony does things right.

Like always that has nothing to do with my point the xbox need games its own games that you can't find any where else that is MS real problem.

No is not similar a 44CU GPU today is not priced even close to how a 14CU GPU was on 2013.

Stop trying to imply that because the xbox one chip and the Scorpio chip have similar size they have the same bom cost that is absurd.

A 7790 the GPU from what the xbox one is made off was like $140 dollars man on 2013 a 44CU GPU today is way more than that,hell the only one is what the R390X?

How much is that $400?

The RX580 has 36CU and is from $230 to $300 so a polaris with 40CU (44CU actually 4 disable for redundancy) is not even close to cost the same as a shitty 7790 was.

Is not the build of materials based on chip size, is based on the tech inside and how powerful it is,since AMD will not sell MS a 44CU GPU for the same price as a 14CU GPU.

In time frame the XBO GPU was low end,Scorpio is mid high power wise so no they will not cost the same to MS which is why they call it a PREMIUM model.

How so?

1. You have failed to factor in Rare has spent most of their software engineering resources on Kinect games. Kinect involves both software and hardware cost.

2. Wrong, the main BOM cost is the size of the chip not what's printed on the chip.

Both BOM and retail cost for RX-480 (232 mm2, 36 CU) is similar to year 2013's HD 7870/R9-270X (212 mm2, 20 CU) both has similar size chips.

Full Polaris 10 XT has 36 CU. http://techfrag.com/2016/08/16/full-polaris-10-gpu/

There's are 3 main methods with increase chip yields

i. Lower the clock speed until the chip works e.g. there's no disabled Jaguar CPU cores and they have low clock speeds.

ii. Disable redundant sections e.g. extra CUs set gets disabled.

iii. Increase electrical current to overcome electrical noise.

3. Define premium. Xbox One S with 500 GB HDD is already at $249 cost. https://www.walmart.com/ip/Xbox-One-S-500GB-Console-with-Minecraft-Xbox-One/54791563

$399 is higher than $249 cost.

$449 is higher than $249 cost.

$499 is higher than $249 cost.

XBO S with $248.58 price tag. https://www.amazon.com/Battlefield-Special-Bundle-Storm-500GB/dp/B01N3QVMAY/ref=lp_6469295011_1_6?s=videogames&ie=UTF8&qid=1495111856&sr=1-6

http://www.trustedreviews.com/news/xbox-scorpio-release-date-specs-news-rumours-4k-vr

Spanish retailer Xtra Life (via DesiXBL) recently listed the console at €399

That's about $443.21 USD.

1-No i have not rare mean shit and is not the only developer MS has and is not the only way MS can get GAMES on its hardware,MS use to pay to get exclusives now basically it doesn't and worse they gave all their games to PC.

2.No which is why we have a huge selection of soc's on the cellphone market with different prices regardless of having the same size.

A top of the line Soc for an iphone or galaxy will not cost the same as a cheap galaxy or other low end phone regardless of the chip size.

The fail in your argument is that you refuse to factor in that the xbox one SOC was 5 billion transistors because it was loaded with irrelevant crap,scorpio SOC take that cheap ass crap and replace it with a proper bigger GPU which will cost more.

14CU don't cost the same as 44CU and you know this.

Oh and this is without taking into account faster GDDR5 more of it,and a very very good cooling system as well which i am sure is better than the xbox one and PS4 Pro as well.

1. Rare Ltd is the primary toon type graphics game developer for XBox.

Windows PC is a Microsoft platform just as Sony has Vita, PS3 and PS4 platforms.

Your "they gave all their games to PC" is false e.g. Forza M6 Apex is only smaller slice of XBO's Forza M6 and Halo 5 is not available on PC.

2. Wrong. We talking about AMD APUs NOT phones.

Again, both BOM and retail cost for RX-480 (232 mm2, 36 CU) is similar to year 2013's HD 7870/R9-270X (212 mm2, 20 CU) both has similar size chips.

http://www.trustedreviews.com/news/xbox-scorpio-release-date-specs-news-rumours-4k-vr

Spanish retailer Xtra Life (via DesiXBL) recently listed the console at €399

That's about $443.21 USD.

https://9to5mac.com/2016/09/20/649-iphone-7-estimated-to-cost-apple-220-heres-the-component-breakdown/

The report says Apple’s bill of materials for a 4.7-inch iPhone 7 with the base 32GB storage is $220.80

iPhone 7's BOM cost is around $220, Plenty fools buying it with massive profit margin for Apple.

Apple A10's SOC size is 125 mm2 with BOM cost of $26.90 estimate (TSMC 16 nm FinFET)

They flame bait/troll, they say whatever they can to people to get a rise really, just walk on.

Although I guess I'm stopping traffic from my thread so do whatever you want :)

Lol how's that a bad thing? Only cows see Play Anywhere as something bad

It's bad for their own business model and makes the xbox one an irrelevant product to buy.

1-You can't play Uncharted 4 on PS3,nor horizon and many other true PS4 exclusives.

So you need a PS4 to play them,with the xbox one is different you don't need an xbox one for most xbox one exclusives,worse live cost $60 on xbox one on PC not only you get a superior version but you also don't pay $60 a year for live which in 3 years is $180 in 4 is $240 that money could easily go toward a stronger GPU for your PC.

2-Is the same they are system on chips just like cellphone ones,APU are a pretty name for the same shit and the PS4 APU is refer to as SOC as well.

You will have a point when you PROVE to me that on 2013 a 7790 cost the same as a 44CU GPU in 2016 or 2017.

Don't argue things you should not argue just to try to win something you will not.

No matter what excuse use you a 44CU GPU is far more expensive than a 14CU oh and that is without taking into notice that the Scorpio Soc is 16NM not 28 like the xbox one.

No i am not talking about the phone value on the market those are over priced as hell we are talking about BOM,a low end Cell phone soc will not cost 25 dollars like the Iphone one.

I don't know about all that. They definitely lose some console sales by virtue of not gaining any PC gamers, and I agree as informed gamer you have very little reasons to ever go with the Xbox One when you can just get yourself a PC.

But the two markets are fundamentally different so having a more unified network probably isn't the wrong way to go, given how PC centric these consoles are these days anyway. More to it, as a publisher of games it's a benefit by having 2 skus of the game. The thing hurting play anywhere is that they aren't doing any of it all that correctly. The PC side is hit or miss depending on the port (Gears 4 was an awesome port, Quantum BReak was a hot mess), and UWP is rubbish and limiting in a way that it shouldn't be. Plus I think they had this gamer mode or some nonsense on windows, and it's actually pretty awful apparently.

MS at that time fired most of it's first party.. almost all the great games they had as exclusives were 3rd party exclusives. Gears? Mass Effect? Dead Rising? Lost Odyssey? Alan Wake? A huge amount of 360 had nothing to do with first party. MS putting a huge effort in with first party is just not reality...

Spencer I suppose has done the best with what he's got after they ejected practically all their first party developers. And wasn't in a 'kinect hell hole', they were relegated to it because it's all they're good for. Rare is just a name, like 95% of the talent is gone.

Considering how well sea of thieves is coming along, this is such a rubbish argument. Not to mention forcing kinect down any one's throats was a bad idea. Look at the crap the 'talent' produce yooka laylee. As far as I'm concerned Sea of Thieves looks like its going to be the better game.

But is you have a PC, what's the point in getting an Xbox One? Play anywhere is good if you're already in the situation of having an Xbox One and Windows PC. Otherwise it's nothing to shout about. Play anywhere isn't going to become something big. Because MS made everything multiplat with the PC, the group of gamers that were PC gamers and Xbox gamers is going to be a struggling market, because those PC gamers know there's no point to buying an Xbox. For the most part, PC gamers want a console that plays different games to their PC. PC gamers are more likely to get a PS4 or Switch at this point. You'll probably get some strays who started out with an Xbox One and moved to the PC. On the one hand MS want to merge the markets of console and PC with their ecosystem, the problem is, they're asking PC gamers to spend a load on a console that will play the same games. If MS want to merge their markets, they need to do their own cheap Steam link for PC gamers, a £30 - £40 Xbox Link or something. That would make sense instead of asking someone to drop £200 to £300 on more hardware to play the same games, that makes no sense.

The concept of play anywhere is great because many games still are not a seamless experience transferring to the living room if you get a PC console. Or that small formfactor PC's are extremely hard to build with similar size profiles to consoles. We are talking about building a jet engine unless you want to drop 300 on liquid cooling. Games that support controllers sometimes do not have the correct artwork for the controllers.. The streaming tech isn't as good as native hardware. My steam link has latency issues with the sound and things are normally out of sync.

Also PC gamers will always be a struggling market for consoles... The amount of games that PC recieves and flexibility makes all but the switch nearly redundant. But if you make my PC library completely interchangeable with an xbox I'd gladly pick up an xbox. There have been many times where I'd like to play in my living room and that ability to buy a dedicated option that is always going to be a seamless experience.. This is a fantastic option for me as a PC gamer.

This such a rubbish argument on your end. Flexibility and Options for people is always agood thing. And with scorpio probably being a better alternative to buying a second PC I'm welcoming the flexibility.

Everything MS have done is reactionary, from dumping Kinect to catch up in sales, to making all their games multiplat to stretch their reach, to dramatically dropping the price of their console to make it look more appealing. As a day one Xbox One owner, you can just see how much they changed things and how quickly the value dropped. They would never have done these things if their sales were closer to Sony's from the start.

Or you know this is actually called responding to feed back because no one wanted kinect... and how is making all their games multiplat reactionary when most people consider that a bad thing because xbox doesn't have enough "exclusives". Your logic doesn't even make sense.

Again rubbish arguments. Trying to portray responding to feedback and making positive changes as bad is the most ridiculous thing I've seen.

1. Your "they gave all their games to PC" is false e.g. Forza M6 Apex is only smaller slice of XBO's Forza M6 and Halo 5 is not available on PC.

2. Red herring with phone chipset. MS's AMD IP block usage is not isolated. Both MS and Sony selects their AMD IP blocks from the same pool with similar BOM cost structures.

Both Sony and MS has the full Polaris IP section.

Both Sony and MS has a subset of Vega section. MS and Sony has to choose wisely with limited Vega IP selection.

Sony selected TFLOPS focus with double rate FP16 and kept Polaris 10's memory subsystem and silicon maturity. Selecting double rate FP16 over improving memory bandwidth/bottleneck reduction was stupid i.e. Sony has yet to learn from NVIDIA's Maxwell advantage.

MS selected improved memory bandwidth, bottleneck reduction and further silicon maturity. MS wanted GTX 980 Maxwell V2 style GPU i.e. a Maxwell GPU with 6 TFLOPS and +300 GBps memory bandwidth and Forza 6 wet track demo has shown GM200 class performance.

Again, both BOM and retail cost for RX-480 (232 mm2, 36 CU) is similar to year 2013's HD 7870/R9-270X (212 mm2, 20 CU) both has similar size chips. More CU with similar size chip with similar price.

The increase from Polaris 10's 36 CU to Scorpio's 44 CU is not large i.e. it's only 22 percent increase.

The increase from Polaris 10's 36 CU to Scorpio's 40 active CU is not large i.e. it's only 11 percent increase.

Your cell phone chip-set is fill with non-specific arguments.

Most PC gaming is done on Windows... Microsoft's business model is doing quite well

Less and less is being done on windows as time passes on. Also they don't get % of game sales for every windows ownership so it's not even the same thing. The xbox brand is pretty much useless at this point.

Windows business model doesn't operate like Nintendo inspired game console business model.

Windows business model is driven by pure number of apps being available on the OS against other competing OS, which leads to customers selecting Windows OS over other competing OS.

Microsoft used Windows business model to drive other Microsoft applications to beat the competition e.g. Netscape, Word Perfect, Lotus 123, Real Video and 'etc'.

If Nintendo inspired game console business model was adopted for MS-DOS and later Windows, MS wouldn't be dominating (law recognized monopoly) the desktop PC industry.

The alternative OS business model was inspired by Alphabet's Android/Google search/Google advertisements i.e. Google advertisements subsidized the development of Android and very low licensing cost.

For Windows 10 free upgrade, MS adopted Alphabet's Android/Google search/Google advertisements business model. Windows 10 S another attempt on copying Alphabet's Google business model.

The Japanese computing platform industry is shit and they are magnitude inferior to the Americans i.e. Apple, Alphabet(Google) and Microsoft.

Sony and Nintendo outsourced thier GPU design to the American GPU companies and Japanese GPU companies like Toshiba (replaced by NVIDIA RSX) and PICA (replaced by NVIDIA Tegra X1) was destroyed by NVIDIA.

NVIDIA's Japanese body count list is sizable.

PC Gaming is on the rise, and based on Steam survey Windows also has more traction => Gaming is more, and more being done on Windows.

Also that last part makes you look like a fanboy, it's just silly

Fanboy? More like a critical thinker.

Anyway the fact is that people are trying to get away from windows within the gaming community.

The main issue is there isn't really many other there, but I know a lot of people who switched linux, takes a little work but you can get any game working on it.

Well then shit, microsoft only got their base money from me for windows 10 64 bit, I haven't bought and likely will never buy any useless apps.

Meh, I might as well switch to linux but I already paid for it anyway. Maybe next computer.

Nothing you said had anything to do with what I said though.

Like I said. Look at the survey. Windows is growing. So you might know a lot of people who switched to linux, apparently there are a lot more that go to Windows.

That's just a matter of the growing market.

Lol, what? No... Those are percentages about the market share. Just because the market is growing doesn't mean that automatically everyone's market share grows with it, that's literally impossible. Windows grows, and Linux is even on a decline with their 0.76%. Microsoft really is in trouble...

@HalcyonScarlet: good question

1-Most xbox one games are also on PC few remain there because they were release before the change of plans.

Few games are xbox only exclusive so yeah my argument is right and having 3 or 4 games on xbox one doesn't contradict my argument unless you want to argue that 2 or 3 freaking old games will some how make people buy an xbox one over a PC.

2-They are system on chips and a 14CU GPU in 2013 wasn't as expensive or powerful as a 44CU one was today or last year this is a FACT not my opinion and AMD sell GPU by power not by size of the chip.

That 11% is enough to increase price considerably.

So again stop arguing crap you should not..

Prove to me that a 7790 was as expensive as a 44CU GPU is today i dare you.

Indeed they do. And it's annoying. But if that is the game they want to play, we will play.

Xbox One has been stuck in a constant state of PS3 2008.

Scorpio won't help, they are gearing up for becoming a steam like entity on PC. Exclusives don't really matter when you can make 20% on every game you sell on the store. Like Valve throw the occasional game every 5 years.

LINK to where i can buy uncharted 4 on PC..hahahhaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaa

As soon as you supply a link where I can buy all Xbox games on PC..hahahhaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaa

"buu.... butt you can't buy zoo tycoon and halo 5 on pc, therefore it doeswn't matter if you have 30+ exclusives on the ps4" - a delusional fanboy

Sea of theives is going to suck. Dude nearly EVERYONE who made RARE great, jumped ship. At best it'll be above average. The only reason Killer Instinct is any good is because of Ken Lobb. And even that game isn't under the RARE name anymore. No one was getting Kinect forced, it had more options, and anyone who didn't want it didn't have to. It's not like being a second rate PS4 is going great for them.

No flexibility ISN'T always a good thing, that's a cop out. I used to always have a PC and always a console, because up until THIS gen, 75% of consoles games were only on consoles. Most games last gen for the first three quarters of the gen were mostly Xbox 360 and PS4, that was perfect. PC for PC stuff consoles for console stuff. YOU CAN NOT have it both ways, you can't kill the reason to own BOTH a PC and console and then claim this 'Play Anywhere' is anything other than bs.

Problems with steam link can easily be solved by the right people handling the job. If they can more or less solve it over the internet, they can solve it connecting over the home. MSs R&D could easily handle that. Yes it's impossible to build a PC as small as a console, because a console is custom made like a laptop. However you can still make them small.

There's a difference between responding to feed back and not having the balls to hold out your vision because the competition has better sales. And how is this responding to feed back? No one asked them to do this. They're struggling against PS4, so like Nintendo (did), MS are searching for other ways to compete. But they do it at the expense of the consumer. Unwritten rule, don't make major changes to a console post release, because someone's getting fucked over, turns out not them. You find a vision, stick to it and build upon it. MS are struggling to build the Xbox One, because they can't make up their minds what it's about. Just because it wasn't selling as well as the PS4, you don't throw nearly everything it's about out of the window and start again, you make a few minor to medium changes and make it a damn good product for its fans. Sony didn't throw anything out with what the PS3 was about, they held strong while in a weak position, continued to improve it and it caught up and became as good as the competition.

MS has more or less pledged nearly all their future releases will also come out on the PC, except for maybe Halo. As soon as they revealed FM 7 was headed to the PC, I dumped my Xbox One. Don't need it at all now.

Again sea of thieves looks like a qaulity title already and has gotten good early access impressions... your shitting all over a team because the 'good team' that left isn't a real argument. Especially when the good team made an above average but nothing spectacular game already...

Your logic here isn't working but it's clearly fanboy rhetoric. Some of you'r sentances don't even make sense? 'No one was getting Kinect forced, it had more options, and anyone who didn't want it didn't have to.'

No flexibility ISN'T always a good thing, that's a cop out. I used to always have a PC and always a console, because up until THIS gen, 75% of consoles games were only on consoles. Most games last gen for the first three quarters of the gen were mostly Xbox 360 and PS4, that was perfect. PC for PC stuff consoles for console stuff. YOU CAN NOT have it both ways, you can't kill the reason to own BOTH a PC and console and then claim this 'Play Anywhere' is anything other than bs.

As someone who has already made good use of play anywhere you are factually wrong, it's flexibility that I appreciate already.

This sort of logic doesn't work with a multi device society we live in. Hell I can play fallout shelter on my phone, my xbox, or my laptop, or in my office... again there is NOTHING wrong with having options. Don't want to upgrade your PC? Buy a scorpio which will likely be a lot cheaper compared to a brand new PC. Your fail to see the importance of play anywhere along with their new BC focused trend. They want you to have access to your games on any windows device possible.

Problems with steam link can easily be solved by the right people handling the job. If they can more or less solve it over the internet, they can solve it connecting over the home. MSs R&D could easily handle that. Yes it's impossible to build a PC as small as a console, because a console is custom made like a laptop. However you can still make them small.

Except it will always be inferior and likely require a very good network to a dedicated machine in the living room... some of which people want. Like my primary PC is a laptop. I don't always want to take it out of my work case to be able to play a game.

Your reasoning is flawed, a streaming device isn't stopping a dedicated device from working perfectly or being an option for those that want it... Not to mention it takes 0 engineering effort and mostly working with developers to to support it. There may be streaming devices planned but Play Anywhere is something that sits outside of that possibility and isn't stopping M$ from doing it. The logic your using is ridiculous... M$ shouldn't allow cross platform unlocks with 1 purchase because they can spend money making a device for streaming? And its even more ridiculous when you consider the steam link the cheaper inferior option but better devices like nvidia shield (only if you have nvidia though) cost nearly the same amount as an xbox... It won't be that much cheaper in the end for an end user.

There's a difference between responding to feed back and not having the balls to hold out your vision because the competition has better sales. And how is this responding to feed back? No one asked them to do this. They're struggling against PS4, so like Nintendo (did), MS are searching for other ways to compete. But they do it at the expense of the consumer. Unwritten rule, don't make major changes to a console post release, because someone's getting fucked over, turns out not them. You find a vision, stick to it and build upon it. MS are struggling to build the Xbox One, because they can't make up their minds what it's about. Just because it wasn't selling as well as the PS4, you don't throw nearly everything it's about out of the window and start again, you make a few minor to medium changes and make it a damn good product for its fans. Sony didn't throw anything out with what the PS3 was about, they held strong while in a weak position, continued to improve it and it caught up and became as good as the competition.

What changes have they made to the console? Sony made more changes and actually lost a lawsuit over the linux thing. They are making changes to make their PLATFORM of windows devices more desirable. People said we don't want to buy an xbox because we have a PC? How did M$ respond? Several of their games made it to PC. Along with more planned. How is this not a good response to people NOT wanting a redundant machine and wanting to be able to play games on any of M$'s platforms. Nothing they added to PC has taken away from xbox, some of it even allows you to share games you buy between the two platforms...

Their vision under ballmer was completely FORCING changes onto people. Force kinect to be popular. Forcing digital sales to become the defacto medium. When Spencer came in they had already reacted to the poor backlash of both of those decisions. Everything else has been good changes to try to make buying games more friendly on their platform. BC + Play Anywhere means my purchases from 360 days are still important to M$... hell I bought GTA4 so I could finish the DLC. Under Spencer Windows is part of the Xbox platform. They are completely executing their new plan and philosophy making xbox another windows 10 device. Sorry if you can see this through your fanboy goggles.

Sad how some fanboys are so fixated on "exclusives"

Xbox/Windows 10 are moving beyond single console exclusives. Their games are still exclusive to the microsoft platform but not stuck on one piece of hardware. Objectively, it can only be seen as beneficial to have such a wide reaching ecosystem. Not everyone has the time and experience to be a PC Gamer. Now people can be only a console gamer or only a PC gamer or jump between both. Only fanboys would call this a negative

@nitropd: Only a fanboy would think its a great idea to pay $10 more for a game so a redundant console could swim in PC's wake. . .

*kermitsippingtea*

Who is paying 10 dollars more (besides nintendo fans)? MS's play anywhere titles give you the games across multiple systems, it'd be pretty dumb to not see it's a better value

Yeah, Scalebound looked awesome too. Perfect Dark Zero looks good too. So did Drive Club.

'Don't want to upgrade your PC' exactly, better one or the other. And just because you use it, doesn't make it universally accepted, just a gimmick so far that may appeal to some.

Just because you can't see improvements, doesn't mean they won't come. I can accept a slightly flawed streaming device if it's vastly cheaper than buying a console to play the same games. Buying a new console isn't the most cost effective solution to wanting to game on another screen. I can definately see MS or Nvidia making a much more effective streaming device like Steam link in the future.

The Steam Link was an example, how literally you want to take that is up to you. The Nvidia shield is not the same thing as the Steam link, the Shield is full of a lot of other stuff and it's also an independent device. The Steam link is a pure streaming device.

When did anyone say 'they don't want to buy an Xbox, they have a PC' previous to MS making games multiplat?

As I said, MS wanting to have one platform, doesn't mean it's going to happen, it just makes no sense. Under DX12, porting is easier, but that's it. Play Anywhere is an interesting gimmick, but it's not going to become something that everyone takes up. These aren't my problems, they're MSs. Clearly many PC gamers feel the same way I do, why drop £300 - £400 on a console that'll play the same games, when the money can go on a different console that can play other games, I'm not even close to the first to say this.

Play Anywhere also works on the notion that people would rather play the same games on all their devices, rather than have variety and diversity and play different games on their devices. I'm personally much more interested to play different game on my hand helds, home console and PC. It's a MUCH more interesting idea to me than buying all these expensive devices to play the same bloody game on all of them. I don't need to do that, I can walk away from playing one game on my PC to play a different game on my console.

Calling me a fanboy and making this personal is just showing a poor struggle on your part.

For a given budget, Xbox = small CPU + big GPU ratio instead of the usual PC's big CPU + small GPU ratio. As long Intel has half-ass'ed approach with IGP, Xbox will remain as is.

You have forgotten Intel's objection with pre-release Windows Vista's GPU requirements.

And? People are allready playing sea of theives? I'm not talking about just looking good, As I mentioned... its been getting good impressions from people that have access to it. Your point is basically invalid.

'Don't want to upgrade your PC' exactly, better one or the other. And just because you use it, doesn't make it universally accepted, just a gimmick so far that may appeal to some.

Just because you can't see improvements, doesn't mean they won't come. I can accept a slightly flawed streaming device if it's vastly cheaper than buying a console to play the same games. Buying a new console isn't the most cost effective solution to wanting to game on another screen. I can definately see MS or Nvidia making a much more effective streaming device like Steam link in the future.

The Steam Link was an example, how literally you want to take that is up to you. The Nvidia shield is not the same thing as the Steam link, the Shield is full of a lot of other stuff and it's also an independent device. The Steam link is a pure streaming device.

You missed the entire point I made...

regardless of what streaming device you need, you still need better network. Nvidia shield works better because it has more expensive hardware... Streaming devices now are only viable if you live alone and have a gigabit network. Other family members/room mates can play on the second device, and if they have a PC somewhere my game performance isn't going to be reliant on them doing anything on the network.

And this has nothing to do with app purchases that are cross platform. There is no reason that Play Anywhere can't be seen as a good thing for consumers. Options give us flexibility to do what we want. Your position on this is actually dumb. The FACT remains is that the play anywhere program gives me more options with MY purchases. Your trying to spin this as a bad thing is utter nonsense.

When did anyone say 'they don't want to buy an Xbox, they have a PC' previous to MS making games multiplat?

People say this all the time. PS4/Xone/PC are largely redundant both of which are viewed as more annoyances or gates to play a handful of games.

Hell see your comment below - 'why drop £300 - £400 on a console that'll play the same games, when the money can go on a different console that can play other games, I'm not even close to the first to say this.'

translation 'I don't want to buy a console because not enough exclusives'

M$ 'OK will port more to windows you can just play them there'

As I said, MS wanting to have one platform, doesn't mean it's going to happen, it just makes no sense. Under DX12, porting is easier, but that's it. Play Anywhere is an interesting gimmick, but it's not going to become something that everyone takes up. These aren't my problems, they're MSs. Clearly many PC gamers feel the same way I do, why drop £300 - £400 on a console that'll play the same games, when the money can go on a different console that can play other games, I'm not even close to the first to say this.

Again... they have one platform its called windows. Xbox is now apart of that platform and they are making it easier to transition between the too and they are interchangeable.

You know the best thing about this? You can now play the vast majority of M$ exclusives on either platform. How is this a bad thing. If you like M$ exclusives you have the option of a dedicated console/PC/both and if they push play anywhere hard it means you have more options going forward with your game library.

So how is this a bad thing because your logic is still quite dumb. The fact is M$ doesn't need you to buy a console.

Play Anywhere also works on the notion that people would rather play the same games on all their devices, rather than have variety and diversity and play different games on their devices. I'm personally much more interested to play different game on my hand helds, home console and PC. It's a MUCH more interesting idea to me than buying all these expensive devices to play the same bloody game on all of them. I don't need to do that, I can walk away from playing one game on my PC to play a different game on my console.

All play anywhere does is allow you flexibility with your purchases. You can choose to do whatever you want with them, which includes buying a PC and playing exclusively on a PC. Or if your a console gamer you can play on consoles. Who thought it would be that simple?

I have an xbox one, it works better than a streaming device... why wouldn't this be a good thing for me?

Calling me a fanboy and making this personal is just showing a poor struggle on your part.

I'm calling you a fanboy because your entire defense is built on this notion its bad to have flexibility with game purchases and somehow its bad that rare left the kinect garbage and is making real games again. Neither of things are bad unless your specifically trying to attack the xbox one... and I mean literally the plastic box you buy from a store. It's an absolute fanboy ideology.

The ideas rely on you thinking M$ NEEDS you to buy an xbox... it doesn't. It needs you to buy an xbox OR a windows pc. Play Anywhere is just a way to appeal to people worried about buying on windows store, and to make it easier to transition between the two going forward.

1. Again, your "they gave all their games to PC" is false.

2. Red herring argument. Scorpio's cost structure is model after PS4.

Again, R9-270X (20 CU) ~= RX-480 (36 CU) in retail and BOM cost i.e. larger CU count, similar chip size and similar price.

https://www.gamespot.com/articles/teardown-reveals-xbox-one-costs-90-more-than-ps4-to-make/1100-6416404/

XBO APU with 363 mm^2 = $110 AMD chip, 14 CU IGP + ESRAM.

PS4 APU with 348 mm^2 = $100 AMD chip, 20 CU IGP.

Slightly larger APU with slightly higher price tag.

Facts, the cost of wafer start is spread across the number chips and both MS and Sony has TSMC fab partner. This is silicon business 101.

Sony selected IP blocks to fit their vision and they haven't learn the lessons from NVIDIA Maxwell. Sony still has the mind set of CELL's high FLOPS PR BS.

MS selected IP blocks to fit their vision and they have learnt the lessons from NVIDIA Maxwell, hence Phil Spencer's comments with GTX 980 type GPU.

NVIDIA can have less TFLOPS GPU and smashed AMD's TFLOPS PR BS and it comes down to better effective memory bandwidth and reduced data pathways bottlenecks i.e. "better craftsmanship" instead of just brain dead CU count increase without careful design scaling.

RX-480 and RX-580 has very bad TFLOPS design scaling and AMD engaged in TFLOPS BS and has paid the price with another red ink in their balance sheet. PS; Intel's patent payment might bring AMD into the black.

@HalcyonScarlet: then Sony has too. We can play your same game.

@putaspongeon: is your goal to lie 24x7

@ronvalencia said:

1. Again, your "they gave all their games to PC" is false.

2. Red herring argument. Scorpio's cost structure is model after PS4.

Again, R9-270X (20 CU) ~= RX-480 (36 CU) in retail and BOM cost i.e. larger CU count, similar chip size and similar price.

https://www.gamespot.com/articles/teardown-reveals-xbox-one-costs-90-more-than-ps4-to-make/1100-6416404/

XBO APU with 363 mm^2 = $110 AMD chip, 14 CU IGP + ESRAM.

PS4 APU with 348 mm^2 = $100 AMD chip, 20 CU IGP.

Slightly larger APU with slightly higher price tag.

1-Yeah hide on small crap like that almost ALL games on xbox one are also on PC.

Is a fact.

2-No is not because the chip is larger is because the chip is more complex to do having extra hardware inside to deal with the xbox one deficiencies.

Larger audio block so kinect didn't eat resources for audio.

Multiple ram banks to deal with low bandwidth.

Extra move engines.

This crap wasn't like that on PS4,the PS4 does have move engines but fewer has also an audio block,and no esram.

But since you love to quote crap selectively..

Did you read the part about external PSU on xbox one? how about the bigger case need if for the xbox one and bigger fan all those things influence price,hell did you calculated the 4k drive?

Claiming the size of the chip determine the price is a joke.

1. Your fact is false.

2. Your "because the chip is larger is because the chip is more complex to do having extra hardware inside" is false and it's red herring to single wafer vs chip size and the wafer cost spreading across the number chips. ESRAM is simple and it's just another memory pool and simple repeated storage cells. Fabrication company's new test silicon on a new process node is usually SRAM banks NOT GPUs. LOL.

Your external PSU argument is another red herring since Scorpio has internal PSU just like PS4, PS4 Pro and XBO S.

Your XBO cooling solution is another red herring since Scorpio has a blower type cooler like PS4 and PS4 Pro. The difference between PS4 Pro and Scorpio is PS4 Pro has a few large heat pipes and Scorpio has vapor cooler copied from NVIDIA's cooling tech.

XBO's Move Engine cost is minor. Don't be a hypocrite, PS4 has it's own customization with 8 ACE units which MS didn't follow. Normal Pitcairn GCN doesn't have L2 cache, 8 ACE units and other GCN 1.1 changes.

Normal GCNs already has Move Engines and XBO has more of them.

4K drive cost is minor i.e. it's already included with $249 XBO S with 240 mm^2 APU size.

The leaked price for Scorpio is about $443.21 USD as expect for scaled up $399 PS4 Pro with larger APU i.e. 360 mm2 vs ~321 mm2

Yeah, I bet Sea of Thieves will be above average at best. I've demoed some interesting stuff that turned out to be average later on. So I'm cynical until the review scores come in for any game, but given RAREs track record, I have a lower bar set for them. They've been on a decline since the beginning of the seventh gen. How much money did you want MS to throw at them before they performed. MS were right to relegate them. I would have had other developers make the games from RAREs stable.

I'm sure you can get a streaming device working directly from a single computer with it's own direct network. Work arounds etc don't seem out of reach for these things.

Except I didn't say Play Anywhere is bad, I said it was redundant and a gimmick. Not the same thing.

'people said we don't want to buy an Xbox, they have a PC' but you said that in the past tense in the context you used it, before MS reacted, so don't include peoples current views.

Now you're missing my point entirely. This isn't about how Play Anywhere works, it's about you saying this is the direction and platform MS are going for, implying they'll make it into something bigger than it is. Which I'm simply saying it is largely useless considering it requires people to own an Xbox and a PC to benefit. Good for the few, unlikely for the many.

Or is it you being a fanboy, because you're taking what I'm saying so personally, I never said it was bad, just redundant. And I don't see consoles as platic boxes, you're trying way too hard to steer this argument with your assumptions. I see consoles as hardware, an ecosystem and a conduit for business. As a former owner of an Xbox One who wasted a lot of money there, I'm well within my rights to criticise MSs flawed direction with your precious Xbox One.

So on one hand you claim, you don't need to buy an Xbox, which is my point, then you make a sale for Play Anywhere from being an option, then a direction for the company, it is clearly a function highly suited to buying both devices. You need to clarify your position with Play Anywhere. An option, a direction for the company. I never mention Play Anywhere, I usually mention MS making games multiplat killing the in-between market of those wanting both a PC and a console. You almost seem to contradict yourself. When I say 'sure but Play Anywhere works on the idea you have and want both devices which is redundant thing to do' you cop out and fall back on the 'it's just an option'.

Seriously, stop with the personal attacks, it looks weak and stop being (or at least trying to be) condescending to make yourself seem more intelligent. My defence doesn't work on those notions, they're just your assumptions on what I think. It's weak, seriously, you wanna talk, lets do this, but cut the BS.