I’m talking as a fan. We usually measure console war victories by number of consoles sold. It’s the front page of this site. Because that means most players aka majority rule. We all know consoles are not the money maker.

MS realized they have a literal monopoly on PC OS with a built in game marketplace that they finally decided to take seriously. Plus Steam partnerships. Lol I’m sorry Sony doesn’t have a strong Pc presence and MS can get more converts into the mix without having to buy a console. But yes, I believe most players >>>>>selling the most plastic boxes. You can’t “win” with minority rule

Your propaganda doesn’t phase me. I made more then clear that MS knows how to scale their games and every machine gets the best possible version. Halo Infinite was designed for a PC that is stronger then Series X and scales down.....if people want the Pc version on lower settings...like I said that’s more people in the Xbox ecosystem. Who am I to tell them which version to buy? We all in the same family :)

As a gamer, what you care about how much money these companies are making? Personally, I couldn't care less, except for installbase, as that reflects in more support from developers and more games. From a business perspective, I'm sure MS's new strategy is a great idea in theory. But so was Kinect and the tv stuff they tried to force down people's throats.

The problem with MS always thinking core gaming isn't big enough for them, is that it always comes at the expense of giving their Xbox fans what they really want: winning over the hearts and minds of core Xbox gamers by just being about the games.

I mean if you look at the specs of the Series X, tell me honestly that you wouldn't want the pc version of Halo Infinite to list a RTX2080, SSD and a Zen 2 cpu as the minimum requirement because it's build to fully utilize the Series X? Instead it will probably list a GTX660 as the minimum requirement and for ultra settings you can probably run it fine on a GTX1060. That's the whole point of MS's strategy, reaching more players. But for a consumer who spends $599 on a Series X and just wants mind-blowing next gen graphics, does it really mean, more players >>>>> selling more plastic boxes? 

Lol are you even reading my post? I said players matter more then who sells the most plastic boxes. And if MS can grab millions from PC where as Sony can’t, that’s more players in the Xbox ecosystem. 

Your second paragraph has to be trolling. Everything they are doing revolves around core games. Game Pass is a core game subscription. Xcloud is about streaming core games. They have 14 studios now. We spent 2 weeks hammering that into you haha. The only one doing non core games is Sony with VR (ironic)

Reaching more players...including Pc gamers with high end rigs and scaling down from there. You were close but it’s ok you got me to correct you :)

I don't understand, you're saying players matter more... So if Halo is designed so it can be played on a ton of different devices with no way near the capabilities of the Series X, that is a good thing?

Maybe I'm missing something, but isn't that only a good thing for the people who don't buy a series X and have either a Xone or main stream pc? I do love me some Halo and now I can play it on my pc for $1 with GP and probably run it at ultra settings with my $150 GTX1060. While if it required a $2000 pc, because it pushes the Series X to its limits, I probably would've bought a Series X instead. Also, it's not the point that there are core games on GP, the point is that MS is using GP to reach a broader audience. Now what you think that broader audience is, people with $1000 gpu's, which consists of only 2% of the Steam users, or the 100m people who are playing on a GTX1060 or lower? 

More players matters more then more consoles. Because we measure console gen winners by most players. Traditionally that means most consoles but MS found a nice loop hole by drawing from its PC monopoly. Get it? MS thinking outside the box to get new players where as Sony still locks players behind the console. 

Your other point I’m not taking the bait. My theory is that Halo infinite will be made for PC specs higher then PS5/Series X. So Series X gets the best scaled down version the hardware can handle. You appeal to the top 2% like you say and scale down. That’s how you reach the most people. 

You can abuse the GP promotions all you like. You can ply on lower settings on PC for all I care. You are part of the Xbox ecosystem. And guess what, while you playing Halo your Playstation will remain off. You clearly have a PS slant and MS got you playing there games. I’d say that’s a win :)

⚠️ MILD WARN: Avoid making things personal ~ CGI

I never heard of a console gen winner measured by players, but whatever floats your boat. For me the winner is the console with the best exclusives and that usually results in the largest installbase and best 3rd party support. 

There's no need for theories how they are designing Halo Infinite, we already know from 343 themselves that they are making the game for Xone as the base console, and on Series X it will be "plus-plus-plus". It will be exactly like Gears 5, which obviously looks better on X1X and pc, but it's still the exact same game and not a generational leap like imo the next gen games should be. Now, if you say Halo will still be a better game than most ps5 exclusive launch titles, you might be right. But it would have been even better if MS cared about the Series X succeeding in the console space, and used it as a flagship title to push Series X sales, instead of GP subscribers.  

I don't understand, you're saying players matter more... So if Halo is designed so it can be played on a ton of different devices with no way near the capabilities of the Series X, that is a good thing?

Maybe I'm missing something, but isn't that only a good thing for the people who don't buy a series X and have either a Xone or main stream pc? I do love me some Halo and now I can play it on my pc for $1 with GP and probably run it at ultra settings with my $150 GTX1060. While if it required a $2000 pc, because it pushes the Series X to its limits, I probably would've bought a Series X instead. Also, it's not the point that there are core games on GP, the point is that MS is using GP to reach a broader audience. Now what you think that broader audience is, people with $1000 gpu's, which consists of only 2% of the Steam users, or the 100m people who are playing on a GTX1060 or lower? 

How they should selectively be, is what you meant to say. Because you've already said in this thread that you're ok with games that play like last gen games as long as they have next gen visuals. Remember, Infamous is a "true next gen" title. So by that logic if Infinite plays like an Xbone game but has next gen visuals then it should be a "true next gen" title :)

$2000 PC because it pushes XSX lol, fucking yikes. Somehow your takes continue to get more and more bizarre. Also after like seven pages you still don't understand how scaling works despite many people trying to explain it to you.

If Halo had next gen visuals (level design, geometry etc. not possible on current gen) and the same gameplay as Halo 5, then yes it would be a true next gen game. Like I said a million times, that's different than having the exact same game on Xone and an enhanced version on Series X. I mean was TLOU remastered a true next gen game? Of course not, it was a much better game than something like the Order 1886, but it was still the same game we had on ps3 and designed around the limitations of last gen hardware.

Now if Halo was designed as a Series X title and they outsourced a port of the Xone version, running on different tech and basically looking like a different game, you would be 100% correct. But that's not what's happening.