@xcrimsonxsynx: "The ability to skip hours or even days of gaming to earn items"

Really huh... That's nothing new actually. Every recent Battlefield had so called "shortcut kits" available for sale. I never bought them, so I had to play the game for weeks in order to unlock all weapons and gear. But if you buy a Battlefield™ 1 Shortcut Kit: Ultimate Bundle for 40 dollars you simply get nearly everything. The same goes for the Battlefield 4™ Ultimate Shortcut Bundle for 40 dollars. There are of course plenty of smaller kits available as well for lower dollar prices. If you don't buy a kit, you have to play the game to unlock the items.

So yeah, nothing new here.

@scottyp360: Clearly you simply lack the wit to understand the communication from EA. By just playing the game you earn in-game credits. Literally every match you participate in earns you in-game credits. With those in-game credits, you buy the loot crates. For example: participating in three Galactic Assault matches earned you 1280 in-game credits. You then use 1100 of those in-game credits to purchase a loot crate, which leaves you with 180 in-game credits. ALL THE ITEMS WHICH ARE EXCLUSIVE TO LOOT CRATES CAN BE EARNED IN THIS WAY, WITHOUT SPENDING REAL MONEY.

"Bringing things down a bit by using HDAO and High shadows, the GTX 1070 improved to 69 to 95 FPS, and the Vega 56 bumped up to 61 to 87 FPS."

THE NUMBERS IN THE TABLE BELOW ARE WRONG BECAUSE THEY ARE MIXED UP!!!!!!!!!!

"We saw a noticeable boost as the GTX 1080 Ti produced 70 to 96 FPS."

IN THE TABLE IT STATES 70 to 76 instead of 96!!!!!!!!

"With every setting maxed, the 1070 produced between 60 and 88 FPS, while the Vega 56 managed 54 to 77 FPS."

THE NUMBERS IN THE TABLE ARE MIXED UP, HERE AGAIN!!!!

@haxorboi69: The cheats were ready before launch. There was a PC beta you know. Of course there is a chance a couple of the 400 banned people were erroneously banned, but you can rest assured they were almost all righteously banned.

If they don't ban, the PvP would be dead in a couple of weeks.

This looks like an ARCADE racing game to me, similar to Need for Speed or Forza Horizon.

I saw in the video that you could easily do CORNERS at a speed of 300 KM/H. That's definitely a very very clear sign that this is an arcade racer. It's not a sim at all. Definitely also not a semi-sim. It's a very fast 100% arcade racer.

Just because a racer has licensed cars or a more mature art style, does not make it a simulator. Tons of Need for Speed titles had licensed cars and looked far more mature than Mario Kart, but they were definitely arcade racers.

GameSpot needs to expand its vocabulary.

@gamer162594: No, obviously not at 4K. But 1080p60 or 1440p60 gaming offer a far superior experience to the 4K30 or better yet upscaled 4K30 of the Xbox One X.

The extra sharpness the Xbox One X brings is nice, but it isn't nearly as good to have as a higher refresh rate. Gaming at 60 fps or higher is such an utter joy.

A high-end PC has for many many years already been capable of delivering 60+ fps performance on every game. Sadly, the Xbox One X will run most titles at 30 fps, which looks very slow in comparison.

Gaming performance of R9 290 vs. RX 470: https://www.anandtech.com/bench/product/1772?vs=1872

'nough said.

A rig with an Intel Core i7-3770 and an R9 290, usually gets about equal performance in every game compared to a rig with an RX 470 and an i7-4770. On average, the rig with the i7-3770 and R9 290 (so, the minimum specs) will be slightly faster when it comes to gaming than the rig with the i7-4770 and RX 470 (the recommended specs). This is because the R9 290 is a little bit quicker than the RX 470.

The specs are complete and utter nonsense. Wait for the benches.

@starjay009: Please, please. Don't be so over-hasty. Do me a favor, and put your purchase on hold, until three days after release. By that time, there will be thousands of user reviews, the critic reviews are out, and most importantly all the benchmarks. Then we will really know how the game will perform on the Windows platform.

Anyways, your rig meets the recommended requirements. Meaning you will get to play at 1080p High 60+ fps, according to our knowledge now. It will look a ton better than on the Xbox One, and perform better as well.

The Xbox One has a far worse GPU, idem for the CPU.

Do me a favor, watch how ugly Final Fantasy XV on the Xbox One is, compared to the footage of the Windows version. Final Fantasy XV on the PC platform will be quite a looker. It's heavily upgraded because the PC platform can handle it. On the Xbox One it looks very blurry and bland in comparison.

@dinamo4ever: GameSpot reviewed the PS4 version of the game, played on a PS4 Pro. They did not play the PC version.

You cannot expect GameSpot to always play every version of every game. Elex is a pretty small release, it's not a big title. You do realize that for the PC platform there are other titles upcoming shortly which are quite a bit bigger? I'm talking about the likes of Destiny 2, Wolfenstein II and Assassin's Creed Origins.