If Microsoft released an Xbox One next year with a faster processor, better graphics card, and more/faster RAM. How would this be any different than someone upgrading their PC with the same components?

If Microsoft changes how developers look at console games, a developer can release the same game that would work on both the original Xbox One and the upgraded one just like they do on a PC. If I bought Tomb Raider for my PC and I had an older processor, only 4GB of ram and a NVidia 780 the game would play as best it could. But if I got a new motherboard, added a new processor, upped it to 16GB of ram and put in a GTX 980TI, The game would just run that much better because of how it was developed and designed.

Why not implement this same design/development process into a console! I would gladly buy a new Xbox every 2-3 years if I could continue to play all my old content and new content!!!

As a MS fan, I have to say this seems stupid. If i want something I am constantly having to upgrade why not just go to PC and buy a new damn card every year. This is the reason, I don't like PC gaming in the first place is the constant need to upgrade.

If this means slightly cheaper Xbox consoles ($300-$450) more often (3-5 years) I'm down with this. I really don't want console generations to last 8-10 years like the last one.

@notnert427: So Austin Walker shouldn't write what he thinks because you think he's too pessimistic?

The reason why Microsoft and XBox got hammered this gen wasn't because people ganged up on them for no reason, it was because they completely fucked up. They misjudged the market and then had to roll back all of their plans which made them look weak and out of touch. Because they were.

If they really wanted this plan for an upgradable XBox to work then they should have announced it along side a plan for how it was going to work. Give me details - prices, hardware upgrades, how you will upgrade, everything. As it is, this announcement just looks bizarre and reminds people of all the other times that a playerbase has been split by hardware upgrades. If they didn't want this negativity then they should have had a better announcement. Maybe this will be great, maybe it won't but they do themselves no favours by making a half assed announcement and letting the public's imagination run wild trying to figure out how this will work.

Just nitpicking I know, but they weren't hacked, it was a DDOS attack.

It's a mighty fine day to not own an xbox one yet, however this announcement shapes up.

If they are available on the Windows 10 store which is on every windows 10 install, that's pretty good market penetration. I certainly won't pass up a great game because I can't launch it through Steam.

Sure, this would be great if it all worked and wasn't terrible, but after that Games for Windows Live disaster, I don't trust them to bring me a good gaming experience on PC. Honestly, this just seems like a mechanism by which we will be delivered shoddy PC ports of games that used to be exclusives. Yeah, a good Halo game on PC would be neat, but not if it's forced V-Sync, doesn't work on half of PCs, etc. We already dealt with that shit from the years 2004-2010, when a large percentage of games released on PC were called "console ports," etc. We finally start moving away and it looks like Microsoft has a short-term memory problem and wants to bring it back. No thanks.

Part of the question is if games will be available for play across a variety of Xbox hardware and at this point it's largely a guessing game because we just don't have enough information, but console developers have traditionally opted to make one version of a game per platform, either by making their game 100% exclusive to the newest version or by making their game with the original version of the platform in mind and not bothering to take much, if any, advantage of the new model's boosts.

It's also different from the mobile market for more than just price. When people upgrade to a new tablet or phone it's usually not just to play games, it could be to have a bigger screen, or maybe they broke their old screen, or the buttons are starting to wear out, or other potential issues where the console equivalent would be to get a new television or a new controller, not a new system. Mobile devices also handle a lot more than gaming, they are used for messaging, for calls, for watching videos, for business, and just about everything else; the Xbox is capable of more than just playing games, but gaming is far and away the primary reason to have one. There is also the general understanding that, unless you have a ton of free time, many people make more use out of their phone or tablet than they do a gaming console; you can use a phone while making use of public transit, during a break at work or school, and any other time you get a few minutes of free time throughout the day and probably accomplish something, but you generally need a decent chunk of free time while at your own house to really make use of a console.

However, the actual cost of owning a mobile device is also inherently cheaper than the cost of owning a console (unless you're the type to shove thousands of dollars at Puzzle & Dragons); if you pay a few hundred dollars to upgrade a phone or tablet, you can expect that to be the only real money you shell out for the device other than your phone bill and possibly a dollar or two here and there for some apps, not the cost of upgrading plus the cost of Xbox Live plus the cost of controllers plus the $60 cost of the games themselves and plus the cost of a headset if you want voice chat.

As far as the process of upgrading hardware itself goes, why would you even get a console over a PC if you need to constantly upgrade anyway? You could shell out $800 for a fully-built PC and have access to a larger variety of games, a larger amount of functionality, and still not need to worry about needing to upgrade for quite a few years. Two of the biggest reasons to own a console over a PC have traditionally been 1) not needing to worry about upgrading and system specs or anything else and 2) console exclusives. Nintendo's been very careful to keep many of their games exclusive to their consoles (though they certainly have issues when it comes to getting third party support), but Sony and Microsoft have only the smallest handful of exclusives between them with most games eventually appearing on both the PS4 and the Xbox One in addition to the PC. Requiring yearly upgrades to a console in order to have the 'privilege' of a decent framerate (or potentially to play certain games at all depending on how this goes down) abolishes the remaining advantage.

On a final note, it's also important to keep in mind that a large portion of people playing on consoles are either children who get the consoles as gifts or adults who, like your friends, shy away from PC gaming because figuring out what can and cannot run on what can be complicated, confusing, and scary. When the Wii U launched there was a good amount of confusion with plenty of parents buying original Wii systems for their children because they thought the Wii U was the same thing or was just an add-on; having multiple versions of the exact same console with some versions having 'higher specs' than others is, short of a marketing miracle on Microsoft's part, going to be just as much of a disaster as a significant portion of the audience won't understand the difference, won't understand why the difference matters, or won't be able to buy the console for themselves.

If this ultimately works out for them that's great, but at this point in time I just can't see a scenario where this does anything other than make people question why they want to use a console over a PC if the former is going to start having the cons of the latter without gaining much in the way of pros.

Actually, Austin's usually very positive and optimistic, which is why I found this article to be a bit disappointing. He's obviously entitled to his opinions; I just feel like this one is shaped a fair bit by gaming's (and GB's) general sentiments towards the Xbox One. At this point, I'm not even sure a journalist can write something that isn't negative about the Xbox One without having to "answer for it", so to speak. I just don't like seeing Austin seemingly dragged down into the "internet hate" mentality, even if briefly. I want Austin to remain enthusiastic and excited about games. We have other GB personalities that do cynicism and do it well, so I prefer when Austin serves as a reminder of why we love games.

You're correct that MS initially misjudged the market, and it's fair that they received criticism for that. However, that horse has been beaten into oblivion, and no one seems to acknowledge or care that what resulted from that is a much better Xbox division under Phil Spencer that has been incredibly responsive to the consumer. They ditched the Kinect and slashed the price. They repeatedly updated the console with a ton of user-requested tweaks and an eventual UI overhaul. They've added some major features like backwards compatibility and now cross-play. With all this, the Xbox One has become pretty damn awesome. Except people have collectively decided to ignore all that and continue flipping them the bird because they bungled the launch. It's petty as shit. The flipside of the "criticize mistakes" coin is "applaud successes", and the latter isn't fucking happening, which I think is extremely weak.

MS is fighting a truly uphill battle in perception and they know it. They need big announcements like this (even if a bit nebulous) to help clarify their vision for the console, and they can't really afford to prematurely commit to every detail the way you're asking, because if they don't completely follow through on everything now, they would be opening themselves up to serious backlash given the early failures in this regard. Since everyone went apeshit over a few policy changes as if MS killed their dog, they're holding their cards a little closer to the vest now. Understandably. Moreover, perhaps "the public" should just show some patience for once and not jump to conclusions. Then again, the public isn't permanently held to the coals if they guess wrong, gets to change their position on if the Xbox One should be more powerful or if it should have cross-functionality (conditionally to whatever anti-Xbox argument they're making at the time), and apparently gets to not know what they want the console to be (because they're still somehow unhappy after getting exactly what they asked for).

Maybe it's time "the public" held themselves to the standards they hold Microsoft to.

As I said, some people are completely adverse to PC gaming. People who play games on the PC frequently under appreciate their broad PC gaming knowledge base. A lot of people have no interest in the learning curve.... and there is a learning curve, even when you buy a pre built system and use something like "Steam Big Picture". The complexity moves into the hardware realm if you start considering upgrading individual components. The vast majority of people who enjoy AAA gaming experiences requiring time dedicated to focusing exclusively on the game are not interested in worrying about which CPU will work with which socket or whether to go team red or green.

I've tried for years to migrate some of my console friends to PC gaming. They have no interest. Monetary cost isn't the issue. It's the complexities of the platform and the fact they are already invested in a console's marketplace, social space, etc.

I'm not a child and I'm not one of my friends. I'm a developer with a strong understanding of all gaming platforms. I own the Wii U, PS4, and Xbox One, and a high end PC I use exclusively for games. They each have their merits. I think you undervalue a number of benefits of consoles: services, price, ease of use, the physical space they occupy.

MS has already taken baby steps in the direction of higher end products in the console space. Look at the release of their recent "Elite" controller. I saw the same malaise when that was announced: "No one will spend $150 on this controller.", "There is no room for a high end peripheral like that in the console space." I haven't seen one of them sitting on the shelf. There is a market for console users who want to spend more money and get a better experience out of their console.

And there's a market for an Xbox 1.5 with the right effort from MS. Since Spencer's been at the helm, I think they've shown the ability to pivot and market effectively. If anyone can do it, MS can. I'd predict right now that MS' foray into the PC gaming space will be a greater success than Steam's foray in the console space (Steam machine, Big Picture, Linux support) in terms of financials and adoption rates.

Console-style restrictions on my PC and g-sync monitor that I paid insane amounts of money for? Naw I'll pass. Good luck with that Microsoft...

@notnert427: I just feel like the GB staff this generation is more out of touch with or at least not very representative of most consumers as they have been in the past. Not only do they have every console, but they also all have 980 Titans at home in a generation where PC ports are better than ever (I know they all don't, but this often the dominant narrative on podcast discussions). So very few of them have any incentive to turn on an Xbox and realize how it's a perfectly competent system, especially so if you are a one console gamer who chose the system all your friends will be on.

I'm not crying "Jeff/____ is a Sony fanboy!" because I know he honestly does not care even in the slightest, but they are trying very little to be representative of the many one console gamers. I remember Vinny on a Beastcast from the last few months acknowledging this, and seldom is it brought up.

EDIT: Reading over my post and playing the Devils advocate on GB's behalf, I realize it is not in their MO to be representative of most consumers because GB is more enthusiast/niche than it is mainstream. But I do feel this is coloring their opinions to be overly dismissive of news like this.

Just FYI, Jeff has a vanilla 980, not a Titan, Rorie and I think Dan has 970'ies and Brad is running a 670. Not sure about Vinny i *think* he has 970?

@hakunin: Fair enough, and I tried to make that concession (I could've sworn at least Jeff and Dan had Titans), but I think it's still safe to say that everyone besides Brad and Austin have top of the line PCs.

The simple truth is that Xbox One got off to a bad start, and they haven't corrected that bad start since.

First it was the heavy security nonsense that pretty much made the Xbox a spyware machine. Then there was the reveal that the console was badly underpowered. And now the Xbox are losing most of their exclusives.

The fact they made this announcement shows the desperate situation they're in. Their console is the lowest selling of the current cycle.

What, in your mind, can they do to correct it?

This is the stupidest shit Phil has ever said. People buy consoles so they don't have to deal with the bullshit that comes with buying upgrades, compatibility issues, etc... Devs like focusing on the strengths of a specific hardware set with no variations to account for. It's just stupid all around, how could they think this is a good idea? Anyone who thinks this is a good idea, build a fucking pc!

I think they are attempting to create an ecosystem where the platform is the product, like the Apple model. You buy all of your games through their store (cross-buy with PC for all exclusives!) and the games will run a little better on the Xbox One Elite, than vanilla Xbox One. It's a way to preserve your investment in Xbox software. Backwards compatibility is assured for the foreseeable future - people are always begging for BC when a console comes out, right? Now you buy into the ecosystem and just stay there forever regardless of when a new model comes out. Upgrade when you feel like it. It's a nice dream.

Pretty sure Dan said he had a 980ti.

@nasher27:Dont you think that they should represent and put most effort into advocating for the best experience? PC offers the best experience right now and this is why they focus so much on it and have upgraded their PCs. Last generation when 360 was the better experience all they did was talk Xbox. I think it would be a disservice to us all if they tried to push anything BUT the best experience.

PC is king of the hill right now, entry cost is about the same as a console (you can get a banging PC for sub $600 that will run everything as well as the current gen consoles or better, and anything that you spend extra you will make up by paying $5-$20 per game on Steam instead of $60), the library is better (everything is being ported to PC and PC has a ton of exclusives from indie devs). And all the hardware fiddling, IRQ settings, processor compatibility etc are all a thing of the past. PCs just work these days. I mean hell to someone that is not a gamer a console vs a PC that boots directly into Steam Big Picture mode are practically the same thing. Each one you press the power button and you see a grid like interface with your games on your TV.

Im not dismissing consoles entirely, I just think that this is why we see GB staff focus so much more on PC this generation.

Sounds like they're sounding the XBox One death already.

How big can the market be for XBox One, Windows 10 and Wibdows Mobile customer base? The only people I know with Wibdows phones are in Corporate and most PC gamers I know wouldn't want an XBox One. All this unifying work seems like such a niche target audience.

You're such a god damn good writer, Austin.

well ... I've been playing consoles since the 80s and sadly, this never ever works out well ... especially with the way consoles are built today ... MS I understand you guys are trying to stand out but you might as well build another system and be in the mix before next console refresh ...

I'm interested to see where this goes. I've always been intrigued by the idea of console iteration, and have never been entirely swayed by the arguments against it. I think that it may very well be all in the execution, but we'll see I guess.

I could imagine that in a few years we're all just buying XBox branded PCs that meet some baseline specs.

Whether or not this is as big a deal as it sounds, at least they're changing their relationship with PC users. I've always thought it insane that they've neglected a player-base that uses the OS they created.

@dave_tacitus: Yeah I forgot about that stuff. We're already part way there. It's weird to think you could play PlayStation games now without actually needing a PlayStation.

If they're releasing games for Windows 10 then they're already supporting multiple hardware configurations, with support for graphics scaling. A situation could arise where multiple versions of Xbox match up to the graphical levels PC games have been using forever - "medium", "high", "ultra", etc.

I for one welcome the Xbone Master Race.

Though I wonder how much of this is motivated by the PS4 being arguably the more powerful console. This would allow Microsoft to claim higher resolutions/frame-rates as a selling point for essentially the remainder of the console generation, even if it only applies to 'upgraded' consumers.

@geraltitude: I think it will be just like the pc, more or less. The pc game runs generally on a number of pcs low-medium-to the more powerful machines, and in each case the game will adapt to the hardware specs. I think we will be able to purchase modular add-ons to increase the power of xbox and the developers will make the game initially run on the original xbox one, and for those who want more graphics can upgrade their xbox ones.

I think Microsoft are feeling the need to challenge, whenever and however they possibly can, the (entirely correct) perception that the PS4 has better hardware than the Xbox One. As Austin has alluded already, this latest 'challenge' is a nebulous mission statement that speaks of "decoupling" the Xbox One from its current (inferior) hardware platform - which is intriguing, for sure, but it doesn't actually mean anything in the here-and-now.

Which is not to say that I'm uninterested by this. But I kinda need to see something...

I currently have an Xbox One and a PC, I get most of my gaming done on my PC these days but have an Xbox One for the odd exclusive and the (very rare) multiplayer session with friends.

If everything is going to be coming to PC anyway remind me again why I need an Xbox One at all? I see a trade for a PS4 in my future...

Almost looks like Phil Spencer is reading too much gaming forums like Neogaf and Youtube comments and thinking: "all these comments about how much our Xbox sucks and PC's are awesome, we must do something you guys!".

@notnert427:

Ah lad, people like Austin don't give MS shit over the XBOX because it's cool, they MS shit over the XBOX because it's taken them 3 years to get to where they were with the previous gen XBOX. If you really think that that he wrote this piece based on some internet fad, I think you're doing the guy a dis-service. While I don't always agree with his opinions I've seen nothing to make him question his conviction or integrity. I reckon Austin wrote this piece due to the fact that MS has done nothing to show that they are capable of pulling this thing off. I enjoy his enthusiasm but I don't want him to be a feckin' lobotomite.

You are right on several points, the XBOX has been greatly imporved, overhauling the UI and backwards compatibility are great for the user base. I've been a PC gamer since '96 though, so I never really thought about how big a deal these things are for console owners. That's great. Howevere've been here before with MS. Every year or two the start banging on about PC gaming being important and nothing comes of it. So even if we ignore everything about the XBOX and focus just on MS's past history in regards to PC gaming, things do not look good. They've got a bad track record on following up and fufilling their grand statements. It isn't just preception that they are struggling against, it's the corporations seeming inability to embrace PC gaming in a way that benefits both themselves and consumers. They could have been Steam if they had the vision and the balls, instead they gave us Games For Windows Live.

As I said in the previous post, if they didn't want peope to shit all over this then they should have come out swinging. Give me dates, costs and specs or fucking shut up. If there were serious about this then they should be serious about this. Have answers to people's questions, be prepared for possible responses and get out there ahead of the speculation. I've been watching the consoles wars since before there was an XBOX and this just looks half assed. Asking the public to just have some patience is ... well it's pretty naive man :) I mean come on, people are people are people. This is what happens when you make an announcement like this and leave it hanging. This is the only possible response that can exist. It has happened before and it will happen again. Time is a flat circle and all that jazz. Oh and the public doesn't have to be held to the same standard as MS because the public give money to MS, not the other way around.

But look man, I hope you're right and this all works. Seriously, it'd be a new and interesting thing. It's just that in the past MS has proven to be full of hot air when it comes to PC promises and splitting your player base with different hardware versions has always been a bad move. Maybe this time it'll work and things will be different but given the history, there is no way I am going to take it on faith that that will happen. MS need to prove they can make these things work or at the very least show that they have a sound plan. Until then people are going to be pessimistic. I'll tell you what, if this thing works out, send me a pm and I will tip my virtual hat to you. Have a good one dude.

I know people who still think the Wii U is a tablet for the Wii. Don't know how this will play out, but could be...not good :/

You're right, that's the only way to do it... but look at the publishers already struggling to optimize their games for the XB1 right now, with just one version around. Adding another set of specs to optimize for is just going to go badly, no matter what.

Seems like this could mean watered down PC games.

No, they're just shitting on PC gaming and console gaming at the same time.

PC Gamers:

- No unofficial mods on UWP games, they are jailed/protected, so no mods until mod kits, mods limited in scope to protect DLC plans (they want to sell you those costumes etc)

- Which also means no community fixes

- Welcome to a world of ads and micro transactions like on console, look, they already put ads in solitaire and now your lock screen too. You can shut off the latter, but not the former. Where else will this crap start appearing? Look at the 360 and X1 interface for hints

- If you hated console > PC ports before, and thought there were interface/control problems or that PC games were held back because of console specs, it gets worse now because these 'universal' games will still have to guarantee a good experience on the Xbox One hardware

Or will they?

Console gamers

- Be prepared to be shit on if you don't have this year's model of the Xbox One

- How are they going to upgrade the Xbox One with no hardware slots? Oh, you'll just nhave to buy an entirely new system like getting the new iPhone or iPad. Screw you early adopters and faithful Xbox/MS supporters

- Now you don't know how thoroughly tested that UWP game is that's supposed to run on multiple platforms, more bugs fall through the cracks when QA is spread thin now testing for multiple hardware variations

Instead of trying to recover the Xbox brand and bring it back to 360 levels of focus and commitment, now they are not focused at all. Renewed focus on PC gaming? Nope, it's a focus on UWP which means lesser quality, none of the things PC gamers value (custom code, modifying, tweaking, focus on high end graphics), and all about controlling the platform.

These guys don't like being in second place so now they're aiming for last place? Honestly I feel like MS doesn't know what the hell they are doing, it feels like they're scrambling to do something, anything, to head off Sony and Valve, with no real plan to please anyone who likes what those two are doing at all. They're scared of Vulkan which will allow cross-platform development on Linux/OSX/console so they want to push UWP, an immature and frankly shortsighted initiative.

Be prepared for a complete shitshow.

Before I had hopes for MS, trying to give Xbox One owners a top experience, doing right by the Xbox faithful to make them as comfortable as possible on that platform and as happy as possible with their purchase by making them feel like first class with quality first party titles and firmware updates adding in what users demanded.

They also seemed to be on the right track supporting the PC with their top first party franchises, trying to make DX12 as good as it could, trying to make the Xbox One controller work well across all Windows versions, putting their games on Steam, etc.

Now they are truly squandering any of the good will they built up, and are doing the complete opposite of listening to what PC gamers want, what console gamers want.

Holy shit MS. I have never thought any move they made is as stupid as all of this. Way to take away any faith or value anyone had in you.

Seems like they're making the worst of both platforms at this point. PC gets extremely restrictive games on the Windows Store that take away reasons to buy the PC version and Xbox loses the stability of a closed platform with static hardware. Let's just get rid of advantages of both systems you guys, people will love it.

All MS has to do is what Rockstar has adopted for PC. Put out a console version, wait a while, then put out a better PC version and double dip some of your sales. That or just release Master Chief Collection on PC and make millions overnight.

I don't know. To me this sounds like a first step to exiting the console business via the backdoor of claiming platform unity.Isn't the guy they put in charge the guy who wanted to shutter the Xbox division in the first place? Or am I going nuts?

Hm. I don't know about the new console every few years idea, mainly because of how much that'd cost. They should just put out a console powerful enough to last seven or so years... Then again, already buying all three current-gen system, this bums me out a bit if they all start doing this. I mean, this is what the NX seems to be, a more powerful system, and while I hope that's true, it's still unfortunate that they didn't just do it first. Spend the money on a super powerful system in line with a great gaming PC (realistic or not, I don't really care), and let us play on it for years to come. Don't make this and that over the years for us to keep throwing out cash... I love gaming, and spend a lot on them, but jeez, I'm a bit afraid it'll become too much. Eh. In the end it just depends on price. I do like the idea of a console keeping in pace with PC. I kind of hope, if it is this new thing, they start out with something powerful.

@ntm: MS has this patent on stackable PC components, presumably they're going to do this... But then you just get hardware with an inflated price, and only MS approved pieces, more restrictive and more expensive than a PC. Makes no sense either way.

http://venturebeat.com/2016/02/13/microsoft-patents-a-modular-pc-with-stackable-components/

This will be great, and I bet you'll see Sony do it too. It make too much sense, there is a marker for people that want higher end graphics and framerate, but don't want to hassle with PC upgrades and tweaking settings.

Moving forward, every 2-3 yeas a new Xbox One will come out that has a faster CPU/GPU and probably more RAM. Maybe a few shiny new features like a voice only kinect. It will be like a new iPhone launch, but with games in mind. The cool thing will be that your old games will run better and depending on the developer maybe updated in other cool ways (this makes a lot of sense too when you think about Halo 5's dynamic resolution stuff).

This will be good for the user base too. Early adopters will buy again and sell their old at a loss allowing more people to get in on the cheap.

Sigh.

The Xbox One has a "world of ads"? Unless you're counting the tiles for the free/discounted "Games with Gold" and Xbox One features/news as "ads", I don't know where the hell you got that from (probably just thrown against the wall hoping it would stick). Also, pretending the PC doesn't have microtransactions is utterly absurd. Regarding mods, the idea of those going through official channels probably isn't the worst thing to ensure quality/security. As for PC games being "held back", the Xbox One version of Rise of the Tomb Raider already fell along the lines of the "High" settings of the PC version, and the game turned out fantastic overall on both platforms. Moreover, multiple MS execs are on record confirming they're working on fixing the few minor PC issues there were.

I have a launch Xbox One. I'm not concerned about them making an upgraded Xbox One, because there's no reason at this point to believe games won't simply scale accordingly, especially when they're sharing even more architecture than ever with the PC versions. The more powerful Xbox One will assuredly fall somewhere between the Xbox One I have at home and high-end PCs. All this will do is add a version within the existing scaling that's more of a middle ground between console and PC gaming. As for your theory about how "more versions = more bugs", they've already had to do games with PC/Xbox One/Xbox 360 versions, and by the time this higher-performance Xbox One actually becomes a reality, most games won't even be making 360 versions anymore, so QA won't be spread any more "thin" than it already has been.

Having watched the Xbox One grow and change over the past few years, I've had a front row seat to their commitment. It's absolutely there on levels I've never seen in gaming (or from basically any company Microsoft's size), as they've literally taken direct community feedback and addressed the issues point by point. This latest measure is set to address basically the last two major qualms people have with the Xbox One in making cross-buy/play/save a reality and offering a more powerful console for those who want it. They're free to broaden their focus now, and they are. Given the effort they've put behind making the Xbox One what it is today, I have no reason to doubt them here. This isn't Microsoft of a decade ago, or of even five years ago.

The common theme I'm seeing from those pitching a fit about this is a hyperfocus on only the potential pitfalls of this. Instead of throwing a tantrum about all the hypothetical problems you can dream up, how about also considering what there is to potentially gain here? This opens up some really cool possibilities like streaming PC to Xbox, being able to play games with friends who may not be PC gamers, finally playing arguably the greatest racing franchise ever and some of the greatest shooters ever on PC, playing some gaming classics that never made it to PC like Red Dead Redemption, etc., etc. Except that doesn't jive with grabbing torches, so I guess we should instead act like MS is the devil and that this can only end up hurting everyone, right?

This whole "Sony is selling more PS4s, LOLZ" internet garbage misses the mark entirely. It makes for a console war punchline, but that's about it. It's pretty clear that MS genuinely does not give a shit about sales numbers at this point, and why should they with their stock doubling in the Xbox One era? Their focus is on a much bigger picture, and if they succeed in blending the worlds of PC/console gaming, they'll have changed the entire landscape of gaming. Sure, they've tried and failed in the past, but so have many, including beloved Valve. Now, with an industrial titan that can really throw money at it which finally seems dedicated to making it happen, enough of an infrastructure for both under the same roof to execute it, and a truly great head in Spencer leading the project, this legitimately has a shot.

I, for one, am not hoping this fails.

@notnert427:

Once again, good writing.

@notnert427: Ads, promotions, marketing, stuff that doesn't belong in a basic interface, especially for an OS.

Regarding mods, what channel you are in should be up to you. If you want the official channel, go that route, but don't force it. Options are good.

As for PC games being "held back," people like to blame consoles for setting the benchmark, and I'm not saying I agree, but if a universal game has to support 5 year old hardware to be a part of this then it might happen. MGSV had low-poly characters because they still wanted to release it on 360/PS3, and instead of creating different models for the next gen and PC, they didn't. That type of compromise will be more likely across games that support UWP.

If a console game needs to be spec'd for multiple hardware configurations, testing and QA will be that much more difficult, which is shown already on PC. If you want to put out games on Xbox, it will require more testing. It's easier for developers to target a single spec. More bugs will get through and more fringe cases will exist. This goes against the ideal of a console as an appliance. Also, a lazy developer will target the spec with the highest user base and not optimize as much for the others. Games are rushed out the door as it is, and this will mean delayed release for Xbox or problems/suboptimal experiences.

Yeah their commitment was good up to the point of "we want to make Xbox a homogenous software platform that can exist across multiple devices," now it seems like a scatter shot that they hope will stun Valve. I haven't seen an MS service last that long before it goes through a rebranding or a transformation or is dropped entirely for some new platform. They seem to have gone from desiring to make Xbox owners happy as possible with their system to saying "well, now you're only a piece of the pie, and who knows you might get left in the dust sooner than you thought."

They couldn't commit to their launch plans. They didn't give a chance for DirectX12 games on X1 to start making some kind of difference. They couldn't even realize their plans of the cloud helping out with processing or whatever crazy thing they were promising with that. It seems like they don't even believe in the stuff they said recently and are already moving on to some new screwball scheme.

I'd love for this to turn out to be ideal and good for everyone, but so far none of MS's attempts to meddle in gaming have resulted in success. The people that made the Xbox and 360 successful are long gone and with the launch of the Xbox One you could feel MS management trying to stuff every revenue stream they could think of into the Xbox One plan and they ended up shooting themselves in the foot.

Of course I want this to turn out well, but how can it? I don't feel like this was even planned for very long and is very reactionary and without much forethought.

Otherwise we'd see Quantum Break coming out as one of these universal games and not as a separate discrete port for the PC. They could instead have put their money where their mouth is and shown what the future could be like by timing their announcement with a real world demonstration of the benefits with a hyped first party IP, but it feels like they didn't even have time to do that.

I think no matter what position MS is, they do care about all of their market presences and aren't just like "sales, who cares" as you suggest, that's very irresponsible to get complacent when you feel you are on top. They should know this, look what happened with the Xbox One launch.

I would love for this to work out but can't imagine how it could. I believe you're the one jumping to conclusions thinking this will be great when there's no evidence it will be. You're just clinging to ideals with a string of hope. Best of luck, save those sighs, you'll need them.