1% of how many people? Can’t just throw out numbers without perspective. On top of that, you can’t just use Steam as a measure when many PC gamers don’t have their hardware tracked there.

I don’t mean to clog the posts here (trying hard to space them out and let others post) but just had to throw this in here.

- Ever thought that MS knows they can’t compete traditionally with Sony so they are thinking outside the box? The only reason we get day 1 first party games is to give a massive perception of quality over PS Now. It’s meant to create a vast difference between brands that sets Xbox apart. This is part of the “bold” strategy MS is doing. 

Not like they are neglecting consoles as Series X is taking the spotlight lately as I’m sure you are aware 

That sounds great, except not many ps4 users care about PSnow, nor are Sony really promoting it like it's a big thing. What sets console brands apart is the quality of their exclusive games.

I get it, you don’t like Xbox’s marketing department. You yourself admitted more gamers use Ps Now compared to GP mostly due to the console sales gap. Just because Sony doesn’t promote it doesn’t mean it isn’t popular, especially since they dropped it to $10 per month I’m sure it’s grown more since. 

I played Gears 5 and Outer Worlds at launch without buying them outright. Those 2 games alone paid for my yearly sub.  Damn straight that’s a brand differentiating factor that Sony does not offer.  

Well we can agree on the quality aspect. Yet you yourself admitted that launch exclusives don’t have to be good games so long as they give a glimpse of the tech. On that we do not agree.  

I know GP is good value man and yes there are some good games on it. But it's mostly older games that are already in the bargain bin, games that bombed but people might still want to play if they're for free and MS's AAA exclusives. Their exclusives are obviously the main reason why people would get a gp subscription.

What I keep trying to say is why MS would put all their exclusives on GP from day one? Doesn't that sound a bit strange from financial point of view to give their flagship games for free and put them on Xone too? How is that helping Series X sales and is it really just to compete with PSnow, even though hardly anyone cares about it and Sony didn't promote it all? 

Well I don't have the exact numbers but from I know Steam has around 100m users, so that at least gives a good estimate. If I look at the Steam hardware survey and only looking at the gpu's, around 1% of steam users have a gpu that's on par with what's in the Series X. So that would be around 1 million gamers.

I don't actually disagree, there is reason to be optimistic, track record speaks for itself.
But you should have an understanding of how I think by now... That until we actually have evidence or confirmation, then it's all baseless speculation.

9x increase of 900P would be 2700P or 4800x2700, which is an insane pixel count.
Or for 1080P titles... It would be 5760x3240.

You need an insane amount of bandwidth and fillrate to maintain playability at those resolutions, not saying it can't be done, just unlikely.

Microsoft will probably take a targeted approach either way, that is... They will pick and choose which games get a resolution bump rather than a blanket increase across all 720P-1080P titles, provided they go down this path in the first place. (Again, baseless irrelevant speculation and all of that jumbo!)

Xbox 360:
* Naruto: Rise of a Ninja.
* Naruto: The Broken Bond.
* Batman: Arkham City.
* Supreme Commander 1.
* Tomb Raider 2013.
* Dishonored.
* Metro 2033.
* Metro: Last Light.
And tons more that could be thrown in for good measure.

~ Only 575 titles out of 2084 Xbox 360 games are backwards compatible. That is only 27.5% of the games library... Unless you are suggesting only 27.5% of the Xbox 360 library was semi-decent and the rest was shovelware?


Original Xbox:
* Jurassic Park: Operation Genesis.
* Halo: Combat Evolved.
* Halo 2.
* Baldurs Gate: Dark Alliance.
* Baldurs Gate: Dark Alliance 2.
* Dead or Alive 3.
* Project Gotham Racing.
* Grand Theft Auto 3.
* Fable: The Lost Chapters.
* Mech Assault.
* Call of Duty 1+2+3.
* Gauntlet: Dark Legacy.
* Gaintlet: Seven Sorrows.
* Brothers in Arms.
* Oddworld: Munch's Odyssee.
* Oddworld: Strangers Wrath.

 ~Only 41 out of 1,000+ (4.1%!!!) titles from the OG Xbox are operational on the Xbox One, there is a shit ton of titles that are needed to be supported, not even kidding.

Nobody's saying you need cutting edge hardware to make innovative games. Hell, I think BOTW is one of the best games I played this generation. But you tell me what is the point of having a new console generation? Isn't it because we want developers to create new experiences that take a dramatic leap from what we're seeing now? Games like Fortnite and Apex Legends probably wouldn't exist if we would all still be playing on 360/ps3. 

Of course, Series X will still have next gen games eventually but by fragmenting the Xbox brand over a ton of devices they are making it exactly like pc. So what is the difference between a console and pc, I hear you ask? Consoles are a closed platform where developers can build their games around the specs of a single device. Even unlocking a single cpu core has an impact on what developers can do on a console, like we seen on the Xone when they removed mandatory Kinect support. That;s the whole beauty of consoles. As where on pc, developers have to make their games so they run on a ton of different configurations and make their games so the masses with lower spec'd pc's/ consoles will get the same core gameplay experience. Now, I know how scaling works but if you have a 2080Ti uber pc right now, can you then really play AAA games on it that take a generational leap over what we're seeing now on consoles? You'll get the same core games only at 300fps and 8k resolution and a bumb in graphics settings. Which will only change when the new consoles arrive and we get AAA games pushing that kind of hardware while targeting 30fps/1440p .

People seem to get offended when I talk about GP because they think I'm saying it's for casuals. I never said that, the only thing I said is that it's for gamers who don't have the kind of specs that are in the Series X. If building GP subscribers is MS's main focus next gen, why would they then have games on it that nobody would be able to play? That's why I'm saying, they won't build their games around Series X like specs and truly be able push the tech until hardware like that becomes mainstream on pc. That's why uncle Phil said there are trade offs as they're not going to dictate what developers will support. However, we already know what kind of specs MS themselves are going to support with all 14 of their 1st party studios.

Sony is taking the more traditional approach where they have a single next gen consoles that they can push to its limits from day one. If they will do a good job at that early on, and if their games will be any good, we will just have to wait and see. But from a sales perspective it's gonna be a nightmare for Series X in the first couple of years. People will be rushing to the stores to get their hands on a next gen console. They'll see a $150 Xone running Halo Infnite and there will be a $699 Series X next to it running the same game, just a bit better. On the other side there will be a $399 ps5 running an open world Knack 3 with full blown Raytracing. They will probably say "oh, it's Knack...." but they will still gawk at the graphics and get excited over it. So which console do you think people will buy even if Knack is utter shit and people will still buy the latest cross-gen COD instead?

Next gen launch games don't have to be great as long as they fuel the desire for next gen and a promise of what's to come. if Sony has those games and show glimpses of things like a new sci-fi ip from ND, HZD 2 etc early on, next gen will be over before it even started. 2 Years might not sound long for some people but the ex CEO of EA games already declared Sony the winner in 2015 when the ps4 already build a 40m installbase by the end of that year. https://www.gamespot.com/articles/sony-nailed-it-with-ps4-and-deserves-victory-over-/1100-6427166/

Weaker specs compared to what's in the Series X and ps5 because only 1% of the pc gamers currently have that kind of hardware. I'm putting so much emphasis on GP and Xcloud because it's become MS's main focus and the dna of their next gen strategy. It's why they are practically giving away their AAA exclusives for free by launching them on GP from day one.

PSNow is different in that it was meant for people who migrated to ps4 but still wanted to play Sony's library of last gen games. They also have some ps4 titles exclusives on there but it's not like they will be launching all of their big games on it from day one. And they're definitely not going to make their ps5 exclusives cross gen for 2 years just so ps4 players can play them too, practically for free. That's the last thing they want as they're focus will be on getting people to actually buy a next gen console.

I know GP is good value man and yes there are some good games on it. But it's mostly older games that are already in the bargain bin, games that bombed but people might still want to play if they're for free and MS's AAA exclusives. Their exclusives are obviously the main reason why people would get a gp subscription.

What I keep trying to say is why MS would put all their exclusives on GP from day one? Doesn't that sound a bit strange from financial point of view to give their flagship games for free and put them on Xone too? How is that helping Series X sales and is it really just to compete with PSnow, even though hardly anyone cares about it and Sony didn't promote it all?