Topic: General Xbox Series X|S Thread

Hi everyone, just signed up here. Got the Xbox series X yesterday and wanted to check some recommended games. Got gamepass and tried out Forza horizon 5 and Halo infinite. I’m impressed so far, great games! Looking for a solid plattformer and an rpg also. Other great games tips are welcome too of course. Thanks in advance!

@Goldbox I have yet to play it, but Psychonauts 2 is supposed to be very good and should cover your itch for a platformer. The original from back on the original Xbox is also on there of course if you haven't played that either. As for an RPG, there's a lot on there. For modern ones, The Outer Worlds is solid. Older classics such Fallout 3, Fallout New Vegas, Oblivion, and of course the Mass Effect trilogy via the recently added Mass Effect Legendary Edition are all highly recommended.

@KilloWertz
Thanks, will definitely check them out starting with psychonauts and oblivion!

So I went back to Shadow of the Tomb Raider and it's a massive upgrade on Series X compared to when I was playing on the original XB1 last year. A lot more stable and honestly is one of the best looking games I've played on my Series X. I know of course Series X games would look better on a better TV (my current one is like 7 years old) but I have no intention of upgrading my TV.

@Grumblevolcano The Tomb Raider games were some of the best looking games of the Generation and still impressive by the latest standards. The 'leap' for me wasn't as impressive as I came from the XB1X to Series X and have one of the best 4k HDR displays of 2016 (yes its coming up to 6yrs old now and therefore is lacking 'some' modern features like HDMI 2.1 so no 4k/120, no VRR etc, but still one of the 'best' HDR displays that 'cheaper' more modern TV's can't match). That being said, I think its still one of the best looking games of the generation and a great trilogy of games too...

@BAMozzy I forgot 4k HDR was a thing back then, I thought saying how old my TV was would be enough to get across the impression that a current 4K display would be gigantic upgrade. It's very basic 23 inch LED; 1080p; has HDMI, SCART, component and RCA ports.

The advantage of having such an old TV is that Switch games look good, I have heard that Switch games don't look particularly well on large and 4k displays.

@Grumblevolcano That was basically the first year of HDR10 specs when you had TV's that were 'HDR Premium' certified (min black levels, min brightness, min 'colour' range gamuts) but things like VRR, HLG, HDR10+ etc were not around. I bought my first 4k TV in 2014. Most 4k 'HDR' TV's for the first few years were nothing more than 'SDR' TV's with the brightness turned up to max and barely much brighter too but at least you 'could' watch HDR content without getting a 'black' screen or error message because the TV doesn't 'recognise' the HDR content.

When you have a '1080p' display with '4k' content, you have 4 'game' pixels to every 1 pixel the TV can display. Super Sampling would look at those 4 pixels, the 'colour' and decide what colour 'best' suits that '1' pixel. Two perfect Black and two perfect white game pixels may end up as a medium grey pixel because the average colour over the '4' pixels is grey. However, you are getting '4' pixels of information to try and make that '1' pixel the best colour it can be.

However,when you have 1080p game on a '4k' display, they don't use '4' display pixels as '1', they spread the 1080p image out across the whole displays pixel grid and interpolate. A single Black game pixel next to a single white pixel at 1080p gives a 'sharp' edge due to that contrast difference. But when 'spread' out to fill a 4k pixel grid, that leaves a 'small' pixel between the black and white game pixel that 'could' be any colour at 4k but without the 'information', the 'native' pixels around it are sampled (which are 'black and white' in this example) and a 'colour' is assigned (which would be medium grey) which is why things start to look much 'softer'. Those 'sharp' contrast edges now have reduced contrast edges so look much softer. This is more obvious on larger screens too as we tend to see with most 4k TV's in peoples homes. At 1080p, only 25% of the pixels are 'native' - the other 75% have been 'interpolated' from those.

Its the same as trying to compare '520p' content on your 1080p screen. Even 720p content, which is the equivalent of 1440p on a 4k Display, looks 'softer' on your HD TV. The XB1S and Switch in docked modes are often 'below' 1080p - 900p for example is like 450p on a 1080p in terms of upscaling and 720p, is like 360p on your HD TV. It doesn't look as bad, because 720p has 4x the information to begin with and 4k TV's at the 'same' size has smaller pixels so the difference isn't quite so bad, but, in terms of scaling, the image has to be scaled up the same percentage. The Switch on 4k TV's would be like having a 360-540p (sometimes dropping even lower) handheld 360p screen device running on your HD TV which is 'why' its often said that 'games' really don't look as 'good' as they do on HD TV's.

Great interview with Tim Schafer (Double Fine) which also talks about the MS acquisition, what its 'meant' to Double Fine and how they are 'operating' and allowing their studios creative freedom, supporting them to realise their ambition.

Microsoft’s video game subscription service Xbox Game Pass may be a fantastic value for money offer for Xbox gamers, but many have wondered where the profit is for Microsoft. Unsurprisingly, there isn’t much.

Speaking on an episode of the What’s Good Games podcast (July 20), Xbox marketing general manager Aaron Greenberg explained that, while the subscription service isn’t extremely profitable, Microsoft is in a very early privileged position where they don’t need to worry about short term profits.

“It’s a different mindset, because if you do optimise for profit… you can either say, “How do we get as much profit out of each customer?’ Or, do you pivot that [to its] opposite and say, ‘How do we add as much value to our fans, how can we actually over-deliver on value? And if you do that, you build fans for life.”

“Ultimately, we think long term that’s the right thing for the business, and will have long-term benefits for us. But, in the short term, yeah, it’s not a big profit play.”

By over-delivering on 'Value', MS have 'fans for life' who want to tell their friends, family and everyone who'll listen about Game Pass.

Even back in 2020, Game Pass was 'profitable' but not a 'big' profit service.

@BAMozzy I think you'd enjoy reading this article if you haven't already: https://www.axios.com/microsoft-activision-blizzard-phil-spen...

"Spencer maintains Microsoft's bid was greatly influenced by the completion of the company’s $7.5-billion-dollar ZeniMax/Bethesda gaming deal in early 2021. “The board of Microsoft, on the day that we got approval for ZeniMax, asked, 'What was next?'”

It genuinely sounds like the upper management at Microsoft isn't that bothered by profits for Xbox right now because they see huge opportunities with video games in general that they want to keep acquiring more companies. It's crazy to think that Phil has managed to convince Satya and all the other execs with his vision. I mean, just look at how much they spent on the Activision Blizzard deal. That to me is a strong indication that the higher-ups at Microsoft are completely on board with Phil's plans for Xbox.

@LtSarge What I find interesting about the statement that it was 'profitable' back in July 20 when this came out, was that at the time, Game Pass had between 10-15m Subscribers.

In the Q3 2020 earnings call in April 2020, Microsoft reported that there were over 10 million Xbox Game Pass subscribers. By September 2020, it had reached 15 million subscribers, 18 million by January 2021 and greater than 25 million by January 2022.

So with more than 'double' that number now in less than 2yrs, it shows good growth. Game Pass isn't yet 5yrs old and much of the investment into Studio's came later. That, plus the growth in the Gaming industry overall is a good reason for Microsoft as a primarily 'Software' Company and who want to champion their 'Cloud' services to be fully committed to gaming instead of keeping it as a 'side' project.

Cloud Gaming is perhaps the 'toughest' test for a 'Cloud' based solution as it means running extremely intensive 'software' in the cloud but also to have minimal latency to actually 'play'. It doesn't matter too much if MS Word has a bit more latency when typing, but if your game doesn't respond 'quickly' enough, it becomes unplayable. So if you can get high quality games running in the cloud with a 'minimal' increase to latency at worst, it helps promote MS's Cloud.

So it makes even more sense for MS as a 'corporation' to invest in 'Software' and 'Services' that ultimately also benefit their 'cloud' ambitions. As I have said, the Xbox 'Consoles' are NOT MS's primary gaming focus. They are a bit like 'Surface' is to their 'Windows' software. Their Primary platform is Game Pass, which does benefit their 'console' too as those games will release on that console exclusively, but its playable on a PC and/or iOS/Android powered Mobiles/Tablets too.

Microsoft would know they need 'big' games in Game Pass every month to attract and keep subscribers. Therefore they 'need' a minimum of 12 games a year and if you can make all those in house, then you don't need to negotiate with outside Publishers who want their profits too. They also have Xbox Publishing to find 3rd Party devs making games that their first party aren't offering. Therefore it makes sense that MS as a corporation would be willing to finance 'big' deals to bring in Software developers to be able to bring the majority (if not all long term) of BIG AAA new releases every month.

It wouldn't make sense for the board to 'settle' with just Zenimax and maybe add maybe a few more individual studio's - certainly not if an A/B type opportunity presents itself - and I think they would need more to be completely self sufficient (ie not having to negotiate deals to bring 3rd Party Published multi-platform releases day 1 to Game Pass). Not saying they 'won't' make 3rd Party deals,it just means that they don't 'have' to find 'something' to offer every month but can be more selective.

I know MS (like Sony) have made mistakes in their past, decisions etc that I didn't like or agree with. However, I also like to believe that you can't keep holding Companies (just like you can't keep holding nations etc) responsible for the 'mistakes' of their past - especially when the management (leaders, politicians, military etc) are long gone. I think MS at the moment are not only 'saying' the right things, they are backing that up with Action. When they say they want to be a fully inclusive, equal opportunities employer, I can see that in their actions and not just in the staff they employ, but in the products they make.

When Phil says he wants 'individual' studio's with their own culture, making the games they want to, that all the Studio's have 'free' choice, and all he does is ask what 'help' they need to make that dream project a reality, its evident when you hear interviews with those Studio's. He isn't going in and telling them what 'he' wants them to make - like we hear from others.

I make no secret of the fact that as a 'gaming' company, regardless of what mistakes etc have been made, MS are setting the 'best' example right now. I really do think that their business model is the 'best' in the industry as it gives creative freedom and individuality back to the Studio's, removes the 'commercial' pressure and decision making. The value is 'ridiculous' - 2 PS5 games (Say GT7 and God of War) will cost £140 to play on Day 1, yet a year of Game Pass Ultimate costs £132 a year - although with Rewards etc, you can end up paying less-as part of the Xbox Ambassador programme, completing missions every month gives me a 'free' month of GPU ever 3 months - so I only pay for 8 months and get 4 free (£88 a year) plus with 'rewards', I could probably get that down to less than just 1 Sony PS5 exclusive. GT7 and GoW aren't going to be significantly 'better' than Forza Motorsport or Hellblade 2, not to say you may 'prefer' one or the other, but overall they are all likely to be critically acclaimed on their respective platform.

We have seen what chasing Sales has done to gaming - Activision is one of the biggest examples. Nothing can 'compete' with CoD sales every year so it becomes the 'priority' to ensure it releases every year and to do that, they sacrifice 'creativity' by forcing studio's to crunch out CoD and all the seasonal crap to sell instead of 'new' games. Often, the 'best' games critically don't get played by many. Take the 'Game of the Year' nominees, few played 'It Takes Two', Returnal sold 560k, R&C 1.1m (old figures from mid 21) but Cyberpunk sells 'millions' yet is a complete 'mess'. Best Selling games of 2021 - CoD Vanguard and CoD: Cold War. Sales is not a great metric for gaming in general as 'Great' games may not sell enough that the publisher will greenlight a sequel and instead opt for the more commercial project.

That's what excites me most about Game Pass - the fact that it needs great games 'every' month, that those games will be games that the developer is passionate about and been supported well to bring that vision to us. That they can be 'creative', take creative risks and have a growing platform to reach as many people as they can...

@BAMozzy That's a very good point regarding accountability. I still find it bizarre how people these days actually use Rare as an argument when stating why Microsoft cannot manage their acquired studios. It happened 20 years ago under different leadership! If it had happened today with Phil Spencer, I'm sure it would've turned out much more differently. Even still, Rare is doing well for themselves in terms of Sea of Thieves.

But yeah, from what I've seen, Microsoft is managing their studios quite well generally speaking. We're obviously viewing them from an outside perspective, but logically speaking Microsoft wouldn't want to do anything that damages their ability to put out unique games on Game Pass. So it makes sense to leave them alone and give them the resources they need to produce great games.

@LtSarge It bugs me too. MS are not the same as they were 20yrs ago and even 8yrs ago were a different company with a different business model.

I doubt Lionhead would be closed and Fable Legends would of been released to Game Pass. Scalebound too would be Xbox Published and released to Game Pass. They were cancelled because of the 'sales' business model where 'low' console sales and increasing development costs make the project too expensive to finish. Why spend millions more on getting those games to release when hardware its releasing on is unlikely to sell enough copies to recuperate those costs.

The whole Game Pass model would have helped them, certainly helps Rare today although whether they can get back to their creative best now,who knows. I do think that Sea of Thieves would of been another 'flop', another thing that people will use to show how 'bad' MS are for devs if that game was not on Game Pass. I doubt it would of sold more than a few million at best, and died as that 'small' community couldn't help Rare support the game as well as they have. However, Game Pass gave people the chance to try free and its probably Rare's most 'successful' game of all time now with over 25m that have played it.

Its 'typical' Rare, which is what the Game Pass model is great for. All the studio's have their 'own' identity and style - whether its Rare, Bethesda, Arcane, 343, Ninja Theory or Double Fine for example. They are 'free' to create the games they want and feel passionate about, with the full support of MS. It was interesting to hear some ways they helped Double Fine on Psychonauts 2, particularly around Mental Health.

I have not been this optimistic about the future of gaming for a while - especially with so many companies recording bigger and bigger profits yet constantly complaining about rising costs and trying to find ways of extracting more and more money from consumers from fewer and fewer games, sticking only with the 'commercial' IP's, almost 'reskinning' them every 'year' to extract more money, reducing the overall quality and variety of gaming experiences. It was looking like that was the 'future' for AAA games with 'indies' offering the 'variety'.

Today seems like a good chance for the cancelled 360 Goldeneye remaster to be announced for Xbox given the N64 version could be announced for NSO Expansion Pack in the Direct.

Not that I want Rare to be stuck on Sea of Thieves indefinitely and I'd love them to make more games, more traditional games but the success of Sea of Thieves is astonishing. I wonder about the number of Minecraft players. Rare could do like Obsidian and support a few games simultaneously.

Total players:

• Sea of Thieves - 25+ Million
• Halo Infinite - 20+ Million
• Forza Horizon 5 - 18+ Million
• Minecraft Dungeons - 15+ Million
• Grounded - 10+ Million

What do people reckon about this?

I have got a modified IKEA Lappland TV Unit with a few of the glass shelf/door inserts. I have only three places within this unit that I could put the Series X, in an open cube (similar to a Kallax Cube), sideways or vertical on top, or what I've actually done which is inside a glass door insert with shelf removed and ventilation holes drilled in the back of it.

Do people think that's enough ventilation? I've got intake holes down the bottom and exhaust holes up the top. Before I drilled the holes I just used the Series X with the door open, reckon I could leave the door closed now and those holes will offer enough ventilation?

I've tried it with both streaming video and gaming. I think I could definitely have the door closed for watching Disney Plus etc. In terms of gaming, even with the door closed, it seems a lot cooler in there than it was with the door open before I drilled the holes.

The main reason I like the door closed is to prevent dust getting in. I know drilling massive holes into it is going to let some dust in but it will be a lot less than if the console was in a completely open area.

What do people think?

@ralphdibny I'm not an expert on this, but the way the Series X is placed reminds me a lot of how I placed my PS3 before it overheated, i.e. the fan was very close to a wall. I know you've made holes in there, but I think the issue is the proximity from the Series X fan to the wall above it. The heat gets reflected from the wall back to the console and that might lead to overheating, which is what happened to my PS3. Even if you were to place it horizontally in there, I think the issue would still persist. The Switch on the other hand seems better situated as the fan is so far away from the wall above it, not to mention that the system itself is so small that it doesn't emit that much heat.

Now I could be completely wrong but I just felt like giving my two cents on the subject.

@ralphdibny from my experience with the system it looks very close to the top shelf. I would say horizontally looks like the air will flow better

@LtSarge it does seem a little close to the shelf above to me as well. The shelf does get rather hot to the touch if I put my hand on it. I think I read somewhere that the top vent needs an inch and a half clearance from whatever is above it, which it does.

That cupboard did used to only contain the Switch but it seemed like the easiest place to put the Series X as well.

I think I'll have to see how it goes. It's fine with the door closed for streaming video but I played Yakuza 6 with the door closed for a few hours today and it did get a bit too hot in my opinion. I think I will leave it like that for now and just make sure I open the door when I'm playing games on it.

@Balta666 the alcove has the same dimensions horizontally as it does vertically. It's not a bad shout though. I think I'd have to drill vent holes in the panel to the right which has the TV on the other side. I'm not amazingly keen on the idea however because that's part of the TV unit itself rather than just a £15 insert.

I think if I went horizontal then I'd have to put the Series X up on top of the unit and just face the fact that I will have to dust it regularly. If I ever get a PS5 then it would end up horizontal on top of the unit for sure! It wouldn't fit anywhere else!