@dr_derogatory: The X's weakness compared to next generation is the CPU rather than the GPU. Sure the GPU is 6 teraflops but the CPU is weak, and if Sony's plans for the PS5 are any indication of what Microsoft might be doing with their next console, next generation is going to provide enormous gains to CPU performance which should hopefully result in more complicated AI. And that's where the X would struggle to keep up.
Having games run at 60fps on next generation and 30fps on X would possibly mitigate for that though.
As for S... well... at least it can play 4K movies, right?
@goldenelementxl: Um, you do understand their original concept died on its feet and they only found sales success by copying Playerunknown, right? So much for your "trendsetters".
Your 2nd sentence reveals that you totally missed my point. Whether that's because you deliberately chose to act like to troll or it's simply because the point exceeded your capacity for comprehension, I honestly don't know, but either way there are others here who will understand and the comment is intended for them.
@CBTDesigner: As the article says, there will be a cheaper version (probably streaming, without an optical drive) and a premium version. Microsoft isn't going to cut off 50% of their own game sales by ignoring physical media so the premium console will obviously have an optical drive. And going backwards from what they had on the S and X would also not make any sense.
For the long-term health... or possibly existence of the industry, loot boxes need to be made illegal everywhere. Parasitical behaviour can only go on for so long before it's rejected. It will be like the crash of 1983 all over again.
This trailer with its seasons, passes, outfits, microtransactions etc. manages to encapsulate pretty much everything that is wrong with gaming today. It's quite sad to see the once great Epic Games - once so tightly coupled to quality and trend-setting - decline to such a degree that they are now the gaming equivalent of a crab-infested hooker, whoring themselves out to the lowest common denominator.
@RicanV: I refuse to believe that anyone could be so naive. Even my dog would understand this. You clearly have a vested interest in this somewhere, and as such, a discussion on the subject with you is clearly a waste of time.
Just know this: people are waking up to this, regardless of how hard you want to try to deny it.
@boaz072: Yeah I saw that. That's all very positive. But I don't think we can be certain that real money wasn't the intention at some point, given the direction the rest of the industry seems to be travelling in. I'm not saying it's impossible that they never intended to include real money - it just seems unlikely.
@boaz072: Ah that's interesting. That tweet is only 4 days old so I guess microtransactions could have originally been in there but were since removed with all the negative publicity, because the earlier articles suggest that real money WAS involved at one time.
If real money is no longer involved then that's good news. But my advice still stands for any games where it IS involved: avoid!
Or how about this video on Gamespot itself? https://www.gamespot.com/articles/heres-why-star-wars-battlefront-2-didnt-just-have-/1100-6455237/
When you're done reading those and coming up with ways to excuse them as imaginary, perhaps you could return the favour and provide me with articles that demonstrate how confirmation bias is all made up and how games companies are not exploiting players?
g4r37h's comments