Quantcast
Should Halo Infinite drop Xbox One and go Scarlet exclusive?

Forums - Microsoft Discussion - Should Halo Infinite drop Xbox One and go Scarlet exclusive?

Should it?

Yes, dump Xbone, next gen exclusive 19 35.19%
 
No, keep it cross gen with Xbone 35 64.81%
 
Total:54
DonFerrari said:
Mr Puggsly said:

But what exactly is "increased scope"?

That doesent doesent mean anything. I mean Halo 5 could have been been more ambitious on the same specs it was built for.

X1 and PS4 are very capable machines, developers can create very ambitious and large scale games on them. I never played a game on these consoles and thought the game design suffered just because technical limitations.

If the goal in Halo Infinite is creating large maps with lots of AI enemies, vehicles, etc. They can do that on a base X1. Even the OG Xbox did that with Halo 1 and 2.

Was Halo 5 beyond the scope of OG Xbox? I would argue no.

You know you are wrong.

If PS4 and X1 weren't a limit to game design then there would be no point in PS5 and XB4 plus any other system that comes after. The fact that you don't see a limitation or how they could increase scope or make a game impossible before doesn't mean it is reality.

Many games this gen didnt really need the power of 8th gen consoles per se. Most of the power just goes into better graphics. However, the biggest limiting factor in large scale games was probably RAM. During the 7th RAM requirements in PC games grew significantly. Muliples times the RAM found in 7th gen consoles.

In the 8th gen however, RAM requirements kinda stayed the same. 8GB was fairly common when the 8th gen started and 8GB is still plenty for most games. VRAM has become important primarily for textures.

Look at Switch, in practice much of its content looks like 7th gen games. Yet its doing fine running Witcher 3 and I credit that to Switch having plenty of RAM compared to 7th gen consoles. I get the impression bringing Witcher 3 to Switch was easier than Witcher 2 to 360. The advent of dynamic resolution also helps Im sure for performance.

Increased specs can certainly allow for games of greater scope or whatever. Im arguing much of that power simply goes to presentation in many cases. I've looked at many games this gen and thought, "did we really need new consoles for this?"

I believe we feel that to a greater extent in the 9th gen. Its gonna be like the 8th gen but even prettier. Dont expect the scope of games to change too much. Also, it takes a lot of power just to achieve 60 fps with 4K.



Recently Completed
Crackdown 3
for X1S/X1X (4/5) - Infinity Blade III - for iPad 4 (3/5) - Infinity Blade II - for iPad 4 (4/5) - Infinity Blade - for iPad 4 (4/5) - Wolfenstein: The Old Blood for X1 (3/5) - Assassin's Creed: Origins for X1 (3/5) - Uncharted: Lost Legacy for PS4 (4/5) - EA UFC 3 for X1 (4/5) - Doom for X1 (4/5) - Titanfall 2 for X1 (4/5) - Super Mario 3D World for Wii U (4/5) - South Park: The Stick of Truth for X1 BC (4/5) - Call of Duty: WWII for X1 (4/5) -Wolfenstein II for X1 - (4/5) - Dead or Alive: Dimensions for 3DS (4/5) - Marvel vs Capcom: Infinite for X1 (3/5) - Halo Wars 2 for X1/PC (4/5) - Halo Wars: DE for X1 (4/5) - Tekken 7 for X1 (4/5) - Injustice 2 for X1 (4/5) - Yakuza 5 for PS3 (3/5) - Battlefield 1 (Campaign) for X1 (3/5) - Assassin's Creed: Syndicate for X1 (4/5) - Call of Duty: Infinite Warfare for X1 (4/5) - Call of Duty: MW Remastered for X1 (4/5) - Donkey Kong Country Returns for 3DS (4/5) - Forza Horizon 3 for X1 (5/5)

Around the Network
Mr Puggsly said:

I'm not interested in talking GFW, we know it was a bad effort. Also, the Windows Store being taken less seriously than Steam isnt relevant. The idea is growing an audience and Im sure thats happening with each notable release. I'm just not interested in the talking points youre pushing on that stuff. Its not gonna be Steam but it can have an audience.

And yet... You seemed to be talking about them.

Mr Puggsly said:

I'm saying not every game on Steam gets a big PvP audience. Popular console MP games arent necessarily the same ones on PC. I think Halo MP will do really well on Steam, but I dont feel the same for Gears MP.

Gears Multiplayer would do well on PC if Microsoft actually released the game to the appropriate audience where PC gamers actually buy games.

Halo Multiplayer has already proven to be a big hit with Eldorato. - I expect good things with the Master Chief Collection to be honest, they have the foundations for something fantastic.

Mr Puggsly said:

Commiting to PC gamers doesent mean putting everything on Steam. I've played Halo Wars 2 on PC, it works fine on the Windows Store. Game Pass is an awesome deal for PC gamers as well, espeically if you just want to use the store for exclusives.

That is fine, that means I don't commit my wallet to Microsoft's games and they can have my criticism instead. - It's also free!

Halo Wars 2 needs a Steam release, mostly for the population boost, the game didn't sell well even on release so it never had a great population even on console... That is one bonus of Steam titles, more multiplayer bang for your buck potentially thanks to the larger audience.

Mr Puggsly said:

Let me clarify in regard to Fable 3. If they really care to make money, they need to get rid of its GFW DRM. Also get rid of any need of CD Keys. Several games on Steam have done this. I think we will see a Fable 3 remaster before they attempt to sell the Steam/GFW version.

No. Let me clarify, it's not hard to give Steam more keys to sell more copies, it would take a few minutes for Microsoft to generation more, there are games still being sold on Steam which is still tied to games for windows live and they are fine.

A remastered version of Fable 3 would be awesome, hopefully they fix some of it's larger story-based issues to boot. (I.E. The time skip.)
But I think we are more likely to get a Fable 4 before that happens.

Knitemare said:
Am I the only one who got dissapointed at the graphics? Even 360/PS3 era games looked slightly better. When i was watching the teaser, and the video started, i tought it was like an ad for a cheap android game, until MC appeared on screen...

They are taking the art style back to Halo: Combat Evolved, so it's got a very clinically clean look, which isn't actually a bad thing... It's certainly going to be less dark and gritty than what we saw with Halo 4 and 5.

Visually the rendering pipeline is pretty damn impressive from the trailers presented, but we don't know what hardware is being used to run it yet.

Only one thing that irked me was some of the Depth-Of-Field transitions and some 2D sprites stuck out, but that are small technical niggles really, I would assume the full release would have that ironed out... Or you just play it on PC.

Mr Puggsly said:

Look at Switch, in practice much of its content looks like 7th gen games. Yet its doing fine running Witcher 3 and I credit that to Switch having plenty of RAM compared to 7th gen consoles. I get the impression bringing Witcher 3 to Switch was easier than Witcher 2 to 360. The advent of dynamic resolution also helps Im sure for performance.

It helps that the Switch actually has modern hardware from a technical perspective, more modern than the base Playstation 4/Xbox One in many aspects.

Mr Puggsly said:

Many games this gen didnt really need the power of 8th gen consoles per se. Most of the power just goes into better graphics. However, the biggest limiting factor in large scale games was probably RAM. During the 7th RAM requirements in PC games grew significantly. Muliples times the RAM found in 7th gen consoles.

Last gen baked lighting and shadowing details into the textures is what allowed games to look more impressive than they really did, towards the end of the 7th gen games started to regress in visuals as details started be rendered in real time... But it also meant that as those details were real-time on 8th gen the jump seemed less impressive on a comparative basis. - But the jump was actually huge.



Yes I think so. The core game design will be seriously limited by going cross platform. I understand that Xbox One owners will want to play the new Halo and not everybody will want to buy the new Xbox at launch and wait for a price drop. But imo it's then better to wait a bit and play a game that is build from the ground up and optimized for the new hardware, instead of the playing the exact same game at 4k at 60fps.



Pemalite said:
Mr Puggsly said:

I'm not interested in talking GFW, we know it was a bad effort. Also, the Windows Store being taken less seriously than Steam isnt relevant. The idea is growing an audience and Im sure thats happening with each notable release. I'm just not interested in the talking points youre pushing on that stuff. Its not gonna be Steam but it can have an audience.

And yet... You seemed to be talking about them.

Mr Puggsly said:

I'm saying not every game on Steam gets a big PvP audience. Popular console MP games arent necessarily the same ones on PC. I think Halo MP will do really well on Steam, but I dont feel the same for Gears MP.

Gears Multiplayer would do well on PC if Microsoft actually released the game to the appropriate audience where PC gamers actually buy games.

Halo Multiplayer has already proven to be a big hit with Eldorato. - I expect good things with the Master Chief Collection to be honest, they have the foundations for something fantastic.

Mr Puggsly said:

Commiting to PC gamers doesent mean putting everything on Steam. I've played Halo Wars 2 on PC, it works fine on the Windows Store. Game Pass is an awesome deal for PC gamers as well, espeically if you just want to use the store for exclusives.

That is fine, that means I don't commit my wallet to Microsoft's games and they can have my criticism instead. - It's also free!

Halo Wars 2 needs a Steam release, mostly for the population boost, the game didn't sell well even on release so it never had a great population even on console... That is one bonus of Steam titles, more multiplayer bang for your buck potentially thanks to the larger audience.

Mr Puggsly said:

Let me clarify in regard to Fable 3. If they really care to make money, they need to get rid of its GFW DRM. Also get rid of any need of CD Keys. Several games on Steam have done this. I think we will see a Fable 3 remaster before they attempt to sell the Steam/GFW version.

No. Let me clarify, it's not hard to give Steam more keys to sell more copies, it would take a few minutes for Microsoft to generation more, there are games still being sold on Steam which is still tied to games for windows live and they are fine.

A remastered version of Fable 3 would be awesome, hopefully they fix some of it's larger story-based issues to boot. (I.E. The time skip.)
But I think we are more likely to get a Fable 4 before that happens.

Knitemare said:
Am I the only one who got dissapointed at the graphics? Even 360/PS3 era games looked slightly better. When i was watching the teaser, and the video started, i tought it was like an ad for a cheap android game, until MC appeared on screen...

They are taking the art style back to Halo: Combat Evolved, so it's got a very clinically clean look, which isn't actually a bad thing... It's certainly going to be less dark and gritty than what we saw with Halo 4 and 5.

Visually the rendering pipeline is pretty damn impressive from the trailers presented, but we don't know what hardware is being used to run it yet.

Only one thing that irked me was some of the Depth-Of-Field transitions and some 2D sprites stuck out, but that are small technical niggles really, I would assume the full release would have that ironed out... Or you just play it on PC.

Mr Puggsly said:

Look at Switch, in practice much of its content looks like 7th gen games. Yet its doing fine running Witcher 3 and I credit that to Switch having plenty of RAM compared to 7th gen consoles. I get the impression bringing Witcher 3 to Switch was easier than Witcher 2 to 360. The advent of dynamic resolution also helps Im sure for performance.

It helps that the Switch actually has modern hardware from a technical perspective, more modern than the base Playstation 4/Xbox One in many aspects.

Mr Puggsly said:

Many games this gen didnt really need the power of 8th gen consoles per se. Most of the power just goes into better graphics. However, the biggest limiting factor in large scale games was probably RAM. During the 7th RAM requirements in PC games grew significantly. Muliples times the RAM found in 7th gen consoles.

Last gen baked lighting and shadowing details into the textures is what allowed games to look more impressive than they really did, towards the end of the 7th gen games started to regress in visuals as details started be rendered in real time... But it also meant that as those details were real-time on 8th gen the jump seemed less impressive on a comparative basis. - But the jump was actually huge.

If talking about them is dismissing them in a few sentences, then yeah...

Windows Store isn't JUST about selling as many games as possible. They also want their own store to thrive and that means not everything can come to Steam, at least not immediately and some simply never will. If you don't like then go use the Epic store.

No, let me clarify. MS doesn't want to make Fable 3 keys so get over it. Go play Witcher.

I'm sure there are other reasons why Witcher 3 works on Switch, but not having to struggle with RAM is huge. The developers were able to overcome limited CPU and GPU, but I think Switch having just enough RAM is what really makes some of these ports feasible or it would just be too much work.

I'm simply saying the added power of new consoles, primarily on the GPU, primarily goes to graphics over increasing the potential or scope of most games. I'm suggesting game design potential is still pretty great on limited specs like 8th gen consoles, while new specs is more about visual polish. It gets back to topic of this thread. People feel Halo Infinite has limited potential because its being built for X1, I feel the potential is more dependent on how the game is designed. For example, Halo 5 was a more linear experience because that's how it was designed. Not due to limitations of the hardware.



Recently Completed
Crackdown 3
for X1S/X1X (4/5) - Infinity Blade III - for iPad 4 (3/5) - Infinity Blade II - for iPad 4 (4/5) - Infinity Blade - for iPad 4 (4/5) - Wolfenstein: The Old Blood for X1 (3/5) - Assassin's Creed: Origins for X1 (3/5) - Uncharted: Lost Legacy for PS4 (4/5) - EA UFC 3 for X1 (4/5) - Doom for X1 (4/5) - Titanfall 2 for X1 (4/5) - Super Mario 3D World for Wii U (4/5) - South Park: The Stick of Truth for X1 BC (4/5) - Call of Duty: WWII for X1 (4/5) -Wolfenstein II for X1 - (4/5) - Dead or Alive: Dimensions for 3DS (4/5) - Marvel vs Capcom: Infinite for X1 (3/5) - Halo Wars 2 for X1/PC (4/5) - Halo Wars: DE for X1 (4/5) - Tekken 7 for X1 (4/5) - Injustice 2 for X1 (4/5) - Yakuza 5 for PS3 (3/5) - Battlefield 1 (Campaign) for X1 (3/5) - Assassin's Creed: Syndicate for X1 (4/5) - Call of Duty: Infinite Warfare for X1 (4/5) - Call of Duty: MW Remastered for X1 (4/5) - Donkey Kong Country Returns for 3DS (4/5) - Forza Horizon 3 for X1 (5/5)

HollyGamer said:
Knitemare said:
Am I the only one who got dissapointed at the graphics? Even 360/PS3 era games looked slightly better. When i was watching the teaser, and the video started, i tought it was like an ad for a cheap android game, until MC appeared on screen...

Probably you are not alone. But for me i am okay with graphic is not mind blowing at all, and for sure it's far better than PS3/Xbox 360. But it's far from next gen graphic we are hoping for. That's because they using Xbox One as baseline hardware. There will be no fancy realistic graphic with this games, the Scarlet version will just ended up having the same look but with 4k and 60 fps capability (just like Xbox One X running every Xbox One games with better resolution and faster frame rates ).  

Yes, thats what I meant, resolution and cleanliness in graphics are good, but the realism is a little bit too low to be a yet to publish game... Truth is I played halo 1 story for the first time like 5 years ago, and even tho at that time it was already outdated graphically, i really enjoyed it. Problem is that last 2 games had a very lackluster story, so graphics wouls have been the only thing to push me to buy it. Even tho i dont think i will get Scarlett any time soon (ps5 comes first), i would like to see the game being developed with next gen graphics on mind, not being held back by Xb1



                          

"We all make choices, but in the end, our choices make us" - Andrew Ryan, Bioshock.

Around the Network
HollyGamer said:
Knitemare said:
Am I the only one who got dissapointed at the graphics? Even 360/PS3 era games looked slightly better. When i was watching the teaser, and the video started, i tought it was like an ad for a cheap android game, until MC appeared on screen...

Probably you are not alone. But for me i am okay with graphic is not mind blowing at all, and for sure it's far better than PS3/Xbox 360. But it's far from next gen graphic we are hoping for. That's because they using Xbox One as baseline hardware. There will be no fancy realistic graphic with this games, the Scarlet version will just ended up having the same look but with 4k and 60 fps capability (just like Xbox One X running every Xbox One games with better resolution and faster frame rates ).  

There was nothing there in that trailer to either get hyped or disappointed.  The space was way to small and did not show really anything but a highly detailed Master Chief.  Once we see the game in action with your usual open vista, environmental effects, vehicles etc is when we really see what the engine and this game can do.

Also, I probably really do not get hyped over graphics anymore until I see the full game.  Depending on where the team spent their budget, it may not be in mind numbing graphical features but in enemy vehicle count, AI, Physics you name it.



No.

I don't plan on buying next gen consoles for at least 5 years.



Mr Puggsly said:

Windows Store isn't JUST about selling as many games as possible. They also want their own store to thrive and that means not everything can come to Steam, at least not immediately and some simply never will. If you don't like then go use the Epic store.

Well. To "thrive" you kinda' need to sell in volume.
If people have a crap experience on the Windows Store, then they are going elsewhere.

I mean, Microsoft hasn't even allowed for Crossplay between digital PC stores in the past like with Halo Wars, this kind of thing shouldn't be happening on PC, it's a singular platform.

Mr Puggsly said:

No, let me clarify. MS doesn't want to make Fable 3 keys so get over it. Go play Witcher.

Let me clarify. I already own a copy (Or two), so I don't need to go play The Witcher. - Nor do you get to dictate what games I can and can't play anyway.

If Microsoft doesn't wish to sell more keys, then that is their decision, but it's also my decision to give them criticism where criticism is due... And it is due on this front...  So if you don't like it (Which I assume from your abrasiveness) then you should move on.

Mr Puggsly said:

I'm sure there are other reasons why Witcher 3 works on Switch, but not having to struggle with RAM is huge. The developers were able to overcome limited CPU and GPU, but I think Switch having just enough RAM is what really makes some of these ports feasible or it would just be too much work.

Witcher 3 scales down in hardware really well, the Ram certainly helps... Even if there is only 3GB of it, but the more Modern hardware is really the driver here.

Mr Puggsly said:

I'm simply saying the added power of new consoles, primarily on the GPU, primarily goes to graphics over increasing the potential or scope of most games. I'm suggesting game design potential is still pretty great on limited specs like 8th gen consoles, while new specs is more about visual polish. It gets back to topic of this thread. People feel Halo Infinite has limited potential because its being built for X1, I feel the potential is more dependent on how the game is designed. For example, Halo 5 was a more linear experience because that's how it was designed. Not due to limitations of the hardware.

The potential of any game is always held back by the hardware of a previous generation, this is an issue the PC has been dealing with for years... And whenever a new console generation hits and the old platforms phase out... Games start taking massive leaps as the baseline has moved up a notch.

Halo 5 was limited by hardware though on the visual front, which I feel might have impacted some other decisions in the games design like Physics effects. - In saying that, Halo 5 released relatively early in the Xbox One's life cycle... So we can assume it doesn't make the best use of the consoles hardware anyway... Infinite will likely leverage the base Xbox One's relatively anemic hardware more effectively.



Mr Puggsly said:

Look at Switch, in practice much of its content looks like 7th gen games. Yet its doing fine running Witcher 3 and I credit that to Switch having plenty of RAM compared to 7th gen consoles. I get the impression bringing Witcher 3 to Switch was easier than Witcher 2 to 360. The advent of dynamic resolution also helps Im sure for performance.

RAM capacity is definitely Switch's biggest advantage over PS3/360, and it does make game development a lot easier, but let's not overlook the advantage of running a GPU 10 years more advanced, which also helps a lot. That's how you get a lot of Switch games running much of the same current gen rendering tech as PS4/Xbone games, stuff that the ancient DX9 era cards in PS3/360 wouldn't cope with. Saves devs the trouble of having to redesign effects and such, you can just turn the settings down instead.

Pemalite said:

 

The potential of any game is always held back by the hardware of a previous generation, this is an issue the PC has been dealing with for years... And whenever a new console generation hits and the old platforms phase out... Games start taking massive leaps as the baseline has moved up a notch.

Halo 5 was limited by hardware though on the visual front, which I feel might have impacted some other decisions in the games design like Physics effects. - In saying that, Halo 5 released relatively early in the Xbox One's life cycle... So we can assume it doesn't make the best use of the consoles hardware anyway... Infinite will likely leverage the base Xbox One's relatively anemic hardware more effectively.

Speaking of hardware, on the CPU side what kind of leap are we most likely looking at going from the Jags in the Xbone to the Zen 2 in Scarlet? 4 times the performance? 5 times? 10 times?

Last edited by curl-6 - 4 days ago

Pemalite said:
Mr Puggsly said:

Windows Store isn't JUST about selling as many games as possible. They also want their own store to thrive and that means not everything can come to Steam, at least not immediately and some simply never will. If you don't like then go use the Epic store.

Well. To "thrive" you kinda' need to sell in volume.
If people have a crap experience on the Windows Store, then they are going elsewhere.

I mean, Microsoft hasn't even allowed for Crossplay between digital PC stores in the past like with Halo Wars, this kind of thing shouldn't be happening on PC, it's a singular platform.

Mr Puggsly said:

No, let me clarify. MS doesn't want to make Fable 3 keys so get over it. Go play Witcher.

Let me clarify. I already own a copy (Or two), so I don't need to go play The Witcher. - Nor do you get to dictate what games I can and can't play anyway.

If Microsoft doesn't wish to sell more keys, then that is their decision, but it's also my decision to give them criticism where criticism is due... And it is due on this front...  So if you don't like it (Which I assume from your abrasiveness) then you should move on.

Mr Puggsly said:

I'm sure there are other reasons why Witcher 3 works on Switch, but not having to struggle with RAM is huge. The developers were able to overcome limited CPU and GPU, but I think Switch having just enough RAM is what really makes some of these ports feasible or it would just be too much work.

Witcher 3 scales down in hardware really well, the Ram certainly helps... Even if there is only 3GB of it, but the more Modern hardware is really the driver here.

Mr Puggsly said:

I'm simply saying the added power of new consoles, primarily on the GPU, primarily goes to graphics over increasing the potential or scope of most games. I'm suggesting game design potential is still pretty great on limited specs like 8th gen consoles, while new specs is more about visual polish. It gets back to topic of this thread. People feel Halo Infinite has limited potential because its being built for X1, I feel the potential is more dependent on how the game is designed. For example, Halo 5 was a more linear experience because that's how it was designed. Not due to limitations of the hardware.

The potential of any game is always held back by the hardware of a previous generation, this is an issue the PC has been dealing with for years... And whenever a new console generation hits and the old platforms phase out... Games start taking massive leaps as the baseline has moved up a notch.

Halo 5 was limited by hardware though on the visual front, which I feel might have impacted some other decisions in the games design like Physics effects. - In saying that, Halo 5 released relatively early in the Xbox One's life cycle... So we can assume it doesn't make the best use of the consoles hardware anyway... Infinite will likely leverage the base Xbox One's relatively anemic hardware more effectively.

Windows Store has improved, much of the complaints were addressed around the time Gears 4 launched. Its not perfect but functional.

Killer Instinct had crossplay between all versions, including Steam. Hopefully MCC will be the same.

Let me clarify again, Fable 3 on PC is shit as long as it has GFW. That version should stay dead or be fixed.

I believe PS3 and 360 have the GPU and CPU potential to run Witcher 3. The RAM though? Nope, couldnt happen. Not unless they make massive changes. Thats my point.

The thing is many games this gen could have worked on last gen. Maybe not with the same engine or visual fidelity, but the scope of the games could have worked on last gen specs. For example, God of War and Uncharted 4  are considered amazing technical acievments. But outside of visuals, Iast gen had more impressive and ambitious games. AC games impressed me more. This is why I argue new hardware doesent necessarily mean more ambitious design, larger scale, etc. I dont think I can clarify further if you still miss the point.

I really question what happen with Halo 5 technically. The game has great looking assets and opted for high quality lighting and shadows, which evidently were not a good fit for 60 fps given the quirks.

I cant help but think Halo 5 may have originally been planned as 30 fps game. It could have potentially been a great looking ~1080p/30 fps game. Instead, Halo 5 looks like a game that 60 fps forced in, not built around it.



Recently Completed
Crackdown 3
for X1S/X1X (4/5) - Infinity Blade III - for iPad 4 (3/5) - Infinity Blade II - for iPad 4 (4/5) - Infinity Blade - for iPad 4 (4/5) - Wolfenstein: The Old Blood for X1 (3/5) - Assassin's Creed: Origins for X1 (3/5) - Uncharted: Lost Legacy for PS4 (4/5) - EA UFC 3 for X1 (4/5) - Doom for X1 (4/5) - Titanfall 2 for X1 (4/5) - Super Mario 3D World for Wii U (4/5) - South Park: The Stick of Truth for X1 BC (4/5) - Call of Duty: WWII for X1 (4/5) -Wolfenstein II for X1 - (4/5) - Dead or Alive: Dimensions for 3DS (4/5) - Marvel vs Capcom: Infinite for X1 (3/5) - Halo Wars 2 for X1/PC (4/5) - Halo Wars: DE for X1 (4/5) - Tekken 7 for X1 (4/5) - Injustice 2 for X1 (4/5) - Yakuza 5 for PS3 (3/5) - Battlefield 1 (Campaign) for X1 (3/5) - Assassin's Creed: Syndicate for X1 (4/5) - Call of Duty: Infinite Warfare for X1 (4/5) - Call of Duty: MW Remastered for X1 (4/5) - Donkey Kong Country Returns for 3DS (4/5) - Forza Horizon 3 for X1 (5/5)