@ChrisAnetkaC: That's one of the most ignorant comments I've seen. Hilarious that you mention Activision as someone who would have done it better... just like the COD4 remaster... you know the one they added microtransaction supply drops into the MP that weren't originally in the game... and then charged people for DLC map pack. Amazingly Activision is the only publisher to not include all the DLC in their remaster. Let me guess.... you don't see the greed there do you since you just praised them.

@craigtl: If that were the case EA could have easily not allowed it to BC and just released the remaster, giving people an option shouldn't be seen as a negative imo, we don't have to buy it.

Also, the PS4 doesn't have BC so whether the game is BC on Xbox doesn't really matter to publishers.

@csward: Yea, that kind of happens when you make a sarcastic comment about something. If you want people to respect a negative opinion, you should also show some respect for the people who like the game by explaining what you didn't like about the game or didn't find enjoyable.

Anyone who who leaves that type of comment should expect the same type of response. If the comment is at the level of a elementary student, people shouldn't be mad when they get a juvenile respone.

Nice, Xbox and Phil Spencer have been great at these type of features and programs, like BC and EA Access. Too bad they waited so long to get their 1st party game situation solved and is still at least a couple of years before we see any of those efforts actually improve that area.

@smackybumbum: Everyone always assumes the worst, maybe if you just view this by itself it looks like that.

Don't forget MS just promoted Phil Spencer to the senior leadership team at MS, he now reports directly to the CEO. Meaning Spencer is now in more control of Xbox and gaming at MS than before. LIVE is doing better than ever in terms of users and revenue from their quarterly financial reports. I think this is more Phil Spencer incoporating his vision for gaming at MS, we'll start seeing more of this leading up to E3.

@sdecker425: Those plans were for a different developer. I don't think Playground Games, or any other game developer, wants to take on a game they didn't have input in the planning phase of the game and won't have the freedom to put their own spin on it. They still have to create new assets, story, writing, etc. MS isn't going to rush this game out in 2 years, it's not Forza.

Also, Playground Games rendering and using all those Forza cars and assets has nothing to do with this game, they get that stuff from Turn 10. They aren't doing that from scratch themselves...

@sdecker425: So you think they built a new studio, put together a new team, started from scratch on the games art, writing, and other assets and they'll be able to do that in 2 years by Nov. 2019? There's no way they have a quality game that fast. They'll encounter some setbacks like every project does, they can't rush the game. Anyone expecting this game before 2020 is going to be disappointed.

This game won't be seen before 2020 and probably won't release until 2021, they literally just started the studio and game, no reason to get excited for this now.

@txuzai: You should do a little research on topics before just throwing out some random assumption or dumb thought. The team that makes the racing game is still making racing games. They built a second team for the RPG, they've hired people who have worked on GTA, Metal Gear, and other open world franchises. The experience with these types of games are there.

@hardcoregamer1: So only MS have ulterior motives? So when Sony wanted cross-play last generation were you complaining about their ulterior motives? Or do you just have different standards for both companies even though they BOTH only care about money?