BAMozzy

@darkswabber Couldn't agree more. I find it ridiculous but you know as well as I do that fanboys will argue over things like Controller layout, over sub services or sales (even sales pricing) - anything that even slightly differs is always a 'win' for their Box and a major flaw with the other.

Sony and Microsoft both have a very different Business model - Sony is very Sales focussed and supported by Services, Microsoft are much more aa Service based Company supported by sales. That alone leads to differences of approach to Sub Services - Games on a Sub Service day 1 is beneficial for the service but is supported by sales, where as Sony only sell day 1 and then support their services at a Later date once sales are no longer significant on that product. Not saying either approach is better/worse, but that does lead to differences to a Consumer and therefore gives them something to argue and fight about.

Different Exclusives and/or Quantity of Exclusives were often a main part of driving the Console War, but if neither differs in Library, that won't 'end' the war because the fanboys will move on to other differences. Even if they were 'identical in EVERY way, the fact that one has a PS logo and the other an Xbox logo would still be enough for them to argue over whilst everyone else just enjoys playing games on whatever devices they have...

Console wars aren't really a thing and haven't been for years - however, that doesn't stop Social Media and fanboys continuously arguing and fighting over their preferred Box.

Even if Sony and Microsoft made identical boxes, each with identical Libraries, identical performance etc so you could buy either and not miss out on any Game, people will still argue and fight about why their box is the best and defend it whilst the other is 'terrible/awful' - so the war will continue long after both sides made peace....

BF doesn't really have that much Dynamic Lighting in terms of the light source on their maps - its a Static time of day with a fixed Light source. Of course you can 'dynamically' change the environment with Destruction so it would have some utity.

However, its obviously more performant without Real Time lighting - much quicker to render if baked in and more traditional methods used. It still looks 'good' if somewhat 'gamey' in certain aspects due to the lack of light bounce or light bleeding in where it shouldn't, Shadows not aligning properly or contact accurate. - but still looks incredible...

Can't say I'm disappointed about Everwild as I have no idea what the game actually would have ended up as. There was talk of an MMO with NO combat - which didn't sound very appealing. Apart from its 'cutesy' artstyle, it didn't seem to have a lot going for it.

@Millionski Gamers are most interested in GAMES and its Games, they way they perform etc that determine which hardware you may choose to buy. When 'new' Hardware comes out, nowadays people want their games to come with them.

Hardware can be an issue to enabling you to keep your Library - The XB1 & PS4 both released with no Games carrying forward - if you owned AC4, CoD: Ghosts, BF4 etc on older gen hardware, you had to rebuy the exact same game to play on newer hardware. PC's at least have been better inn that regard.

If you buy a license to access a game, then you want to be able to play that game regardless of hardware - however, Platforms are not happy to let you download their version for 'free' because you bought a License through a different seller and publishers too would rather sell multiple copies. MS is no different in reality, but as they have more than 1 Platform, they are selling you a 'License' for their Platforms - regardless of whether that is an Xbox Console, a Windows PC or any Cloud enabled device. If you buy from them, you get a Licence encompassing all their Platforms and Direct Storage/Play Anywhere are part of that. Instead of buying a last gen version and paying a fee for a next-gen version, maybe having to rebuy games on newer hardware or only being able to play that game on that specific Hardware, the licence you bought is for that game on ANY Platform within that ecosystem rather than being 'locked' to a specific Hardware SKU. You bought the Game on a Microsoft Platform, you get to play on ANY Microsoft platform.

At the moment, they obviously have two distinctly different OS's and Hardware (I know the console has 2 variations but ultimately the same hardware structure), but Windows PC games have been around for decades and will likely continue long after the next gen Consoles have gone, getting Windows games is great for your Library - even if you ONLY play on Consoles today.

MS are acknowledging that Games are the most important - long after the Hardware they released on has gone so are trying to put the games first - but can't give you a license on PS, Switch or Steam for example as they want their 'money' from sales so give a licence in theirs. Its almost like Sony saying you've bought Spider-Man or God of War and as you own a Licence, that licence lets you play by streaming your own game or playing on PC's - although unlike MS, Sony don't have their own PC platform and release through Steam, Epic as a third Party Publisher. MS may well use Steam too, but they also Publish on their own PC platform.

I haven't played it yet but I don't feel the 'need' to jump back into it as I have beaten the 360 and Ultimate Edition versions and I had heard there was some 'bugs' so I felt that I can certainly wait to play it.

Its a 10yr Old game with a 20yr old Core and given away 'free' to owners of the game already. If I hadn't received a 'free' code, I certainly wouldn't have bought Day 1 or pre-downloaded on Game Pass despite being a Gears fan.

I wish they 'updated' it more and certainly improved the AI which feels like its 20, yrs Old and extremely limited/frustrating. It just seems like its the 10yr old game with the settings changed - output Res now 4k, Frame rates not capped to 30, other visual settings turned up from medium to high (or better), but NOTHING else tweaked, updated, improved or expanded on - its ore a Port than a 'remaster' as a remaster I believe should have new Assets created, new features or techniques added (lumin/Nanite), Improved physics, AI etc.

Of course we know that its main purpose was more to release the game on PS5 rather than provide a second remaster for their OWN customers. They probably didn't expect to sell any copies on Xbox as its 'free' on Game Pass and the Ultimate Edition is playable on Series Hardware - therefore they gave 'free' upgrades away so the MP has some Xbox representation as many probably won't buy it a 3rd time, certainly not at launch when they can play the Ultimate edition for a lot less money.

I'll probably just play this on my RoG Xbox Ally X when I get that - a Play Anywhere game that has been Verified and according to those who played it at Gamescom, it played very well.

Gears ReLoaded would have to be my TOP choice - but I'm not actually playing it through Game Pass. I was a recipient of a Free Code from Microsoft so had it pre-installed weeks ago.

Hellblade seems somewhat a weird addition to this in my mind as its more an 'update' to the original release - now renamed to match the PS5 release name - but its still an incredibly well made and superb Audio experience, if a somewhat mediocre 'game'.

I don't really expect to see anything that will be of interest to me and doubt I'll watch it live either.

If we do get Forza Horizons going to Japan with its massive car culture, it would make sense to 'reveal' there but I don't expect to see more about the games I'm interested in coming in 2026 - fable, Clockwork Revolution, Gears E-Day etc.

I don't expect the show to be targeted towards the games and delivery style I enjoy in general so its always something I catch up on news post event.

I already bought it with the 'upgrade' path through Game Pass - it enabled earlier access too if I recall...

Therefore I've already bought so had to say yes!

@RentedPanda yes decisions do have an impact - but the fact that the world is in Economic Turmoil is what leads to this 'decisions' in the first place. You don't know how the 'waves' of Job Losses in 2024 affected projects - inc thos like Perfect Dark for example. They may have 'lost' CD staff working on Perfect Dark during that cull which impacted on MS and their 'expected' deadlines.

The fact is that Embracer, Microsoft, Sony, Ubisoft etc etc have all had to cut quite a significant chunk of Jobs AND Projects is the reason. If they thought that there was money to be made, these people would still be employed. Its not as if other Games aren't in development that may need 'extra' support on to ensure they arrive on time and in a state we as gamers would find acceptable. Its nnot as if Embracer can't hire them out for another project or even use them to help their OWN projects that are falling behind.

The reason we are still seeing Job losses and cancelled projects is because they believe they cannot Sustain the workforce in the current Economic Climate and it seems to be getting 'worse', not better.

We saw the same thing a decade ago when the Market was struggling - we saw numerous Games Cancelled, Studio's closed etc and then a few years later, those same Publishers were back on the Market looking to invest and expand. The disaster launch of XB1 saw Lionhead gone, Fable and Scalebound Cancelled and MS reduced to a 'few' Studios.

If the state of the world was different, they wouldn't be losing their Jobs and likely to invest more in 'risky' projects etc but in the current situation, they are not 'committing' to anything more than they 'need' in the hope they survive the next few years or so, survive until things pick up again. The rising costs could mean that they run out of money before those products are ready to release and/or when they do a 'year' or more from now, they may not sell enough to cover the Cost because Globally some markets are collapsing due to rising Cost of Living and other markets are 'closed' or very limited due to war/conflicts. Trade Wars to mean that products are not being bought in quantity and whilst the price jumps up, the Company isn't getting that money, the Consumer isn't getting 'more'.

In other words, they don't feel that their Products will sell enough to cover their Costs so Cuts need to be made to their Costs so that don't go bankrupt. Gaming companies rely on you buying their Products - but as Consumer spending dries, they stop buying 'new' games and opt to play their Backlog, games on cheap sub services (inc PS+ Essential/Game Pass Core games), playing Free to Play games (Warzone, Fortnite, Roblox, PubG etc etc) or at most, games on sale costing a 'fraction' of their Launch price. Therefore, these companies are making cuts, cancelling projects etc because its the Global condition impacting ALL equally - its why MS had to make the decisions they did, why Embracer had to react the way they did (sameas they did last year too after buying that Studio and IP from Square Enix who needed to generate income to 'survive'.

@Millionski Ultimately, I do expect them to drop their 'console' for a Full Windows PC as that is still their Platform and as I said, makes game development a bit easier as they won't have to port/optimise for their Console Hardware and makes it easier to deliver Play Anywhere (if every game also gets a PC release) and BC too is easier as PC gamers have enjoyed that aspect for decades.

My point was more about the transitional phase between a locked Console and an open full Windows based Platform. Consoles are often subsidised and make money from Sub services, Monopoly Store front etc. An open Platform can't charge for Online Social Gaming because you'd bu from Steam or other platforms that don't lock content behind a Sub pay wall.

IF MS release a Console with the RoG Ally like Full Windows 11, then why would you buy games like Gears of War, Call of Duty or any of their Social games as they require Game Pass Core to access that content, but buy and play through steam and you don't need Game Pass Core. So either MS will scrap that aspect of their Subscription OR will have to 'lock' their next Hardware and maybe make Apps, like Steam require Game Pass Core to access - that way they still get the Sub fee regardless and will still get money regardless of where you buy.

I don't know that Microsoft will go 'full' PC with their next hardware, but ultimately I don't think that Xbox 'Console' needs to exist in 2026. The reason MS brought Xbox to market was because they wanted to make their 'Gaming API' (Direct X) important for gaming so its required for their Console. Not only that, Consoles couldn't play 'PC' games and that's where Microsoft had developed and released Games. PC's were very expensive - even to play games like Doom so were prohibitive for Mainstream gamers. For MS to become a Mainstream Gaming company, they had to build a Console - now 25yrs later, you can play games without the need of Hardware and 'cheap' PC's these days can play games at Console like quality so the 'need' to provide Hardware is not there - of course People WANT hardware so there is a reason to make it.

They started by making and releasing games on their PC platform but had to make a Console because PC's were too expensive and NOT mainstream accessible - now PC's are and can be as low as Console hardware prices without the Console 'hidden' extra costs - Like Sub services to unlock all content, features etc you bought your hardware for, only one Digital storefront so no Competition to drive prices down etc. So if MS make a 'PC' rather than a Console, I do wonder if they'll lose GPC subs and/or Sales that cover subsidies on Hardware.

@RentedPanda Again that is NOT MS's fault - Embracer cut staff from Crystal Dynamics already and that was having a negative impact on Tomb Raider and also may have had an impact on MS decision to cancel Perfect Dark -knowing it may now take lomger before its released due to staff culling at Crystal Dynamics made the project to expensive to coninue.

Embracer still has a choice - they 'bought' the Studio so have the authority to move them to other Studio's or Projects in development, inc their own Tomb Raider that lost staff working on it. They didn't have to fire - unless like the rest of the industry, they believe that revenue is going to be much tougher to generate whilst their own Costs are increasing rapidly and in an unstable Economic climate, would rather operate on almost Skeleton crews, work only on the least risky projects, not create new IP's etc because they expect revenue to be increasingly difficult to maintain.

@Millionski Whether or not its the Full Windows 11, its difficult to say. Its entirely possible that the processes and elements of Windows that are NOT required/switched off on these PC handhelds, is NOT supplied/built in to their Console so that it still runs Windows 11 games, but can't boot to the Full windows. Steam, GoG etc can be added as Apss into their 'Dashboard' so you don't need to go to Windows to access them, but also if MS decide you can't use a certain retailer/app, it won't be on their Dashboard and you can't go to Windows desktop to findand install.

That way, they still have the Control like they do with the Console and even have other Game Apps behind their Game Pass Core tier - to play Steam games, you need their Sub on their Platform. Otherwise, they may have to drop the Online fee otherwise pople will buy from other retailers who don't require a fee to access all content.

It makes sense in the long run for Xbox to be more a Windows PC. Microsoft only need to make the game 'once' without the costs of porting and optimising for a console (or even multiple Consoles). Take Starfield - built for PC's first and foremost, then ported down to 2 different spec Consoles, each requiring time and money to get working in a satisfactory way. With Windows 11 based, they build the game once and at most, provide 'default' settings for that hardware. Like any PC game though, you can tweak settings yourself, but if you just want to jump straight in, its 'default' settings provide a 'console' like experience.

@SodaPop6548 This has NOTHING to do with MS. Crystal Dynamics are now owned by Embracer - who cut the staff force last year whilst both Perfect Dark and Tomb Raider were in active deveopment.

In case you haven't noticed, all the major Publisher, not just Microsoft, but Sony, Ubisoft, Embracer, Square Enix, Warner Bros etc have closed Studios, reduced their staff at other Studios and cancelled games in Development. Warner Bros cancelled Wonder Woman and closed down Monolith, Sony have cancelled numerous games, reduced Bungies Staff on numerous occasions, closed Studios (Savage games aquired Aug 2022, closed less than 2yrs later for example). Ubisoft too shut down numerous studios and Square Enix sold off some Studios/IP's.

Point is, costs are rising, many places are struggling financially and even some territories are no longer 'open' to trade with. You can't sell your games/hardware in some areas that were open 5yrs ago and as people are struggling to keep up with Cost of Living increases, they aren't buying new games.

Gen Z in particular are NOT spending much money on games - its mostly Gen X that buy games! Fortnite, Apex, Roblox, Warzone and other Free to Play games are where GenZ choose to play and on ANY device. If they do buy, its old games on sale or maybe just play games they get with their Subscription (PS+, Game Pass etc).

All that puts pressure on ALL gaming Companies. They 'predict' that the amount of Revenue their Gaming business is 'likely' to generate based on current Economic Market assessment and what analysts 'predict' for the future and adjust their 'business' plans/models etc so that they don't overspend and end up losing money.

It times of Economic Boom, you see growth and investment - as Gaming was going well and actually boomed during the Pandemic, we saw numerous Studios being Acquired but since then, there has not been 'Economic Stability', Sanctions and Tariffs between various Countries impacting trade and pricing, including all the fuel and distribution costs etc.

Gaming maybe an escape from reality, not political and universally enjoyed - but that doesn't mean its not impacted by Social and Political events occuring. If you suddenly can't sell your products to millions of people you once could gave or situations in their country mean that people aren't buying or even playing games, having to pay Tariffs to distribute to certain areas (increased costs/reduced sales - PS5 saw a big drop in sales this month in the US after a price rise) and Publishers 'want' to put their Game Prices up, but for consumers, its already too high and many not buying. So they either have to shed costs (cut down wage bills, overhead bills if you close Studios, on-going development costs by cancelling games etc) or put prices up to cover those Costs.

I wish the Global situation was different so that Games aren't being Cancelled, Studios aren't being Closed, Game Creators aren't losing their Jobs etc. I'd rather we were in a Golden Age where there is no conflicts, no trade wars etc, that the world was in a very stable and good economic situation - but its not and that impacts everyone and every market - leisure is often the first to be hit hard as people sacrifice that first to ensure they have food and a roof over their head...

There was some rumour/leak that when Embracer shed staff from Crystal Dynamics last year, before Perfect Dark was cancelled, that led to Tomb Raider falling behind schedule and wouldn't meet the deadlines it originally expected. Maybe when Perfect Dark was cancelled, they got back on track but losing staff again certainly won't help its development.

It just goes to show that Game Pass subscribers still pre-order and buy Content. Whilst they may not be pre-ordering the Base game, they are still buying the Vault edition 'upgrade'.

People have almost always whinged about CoD - W@W was a step back for CoD after CoD4:MW, then when MW2 was revealed, it was too bright (not gritty), too many pop-ups and notifications like an Arcade game, changing the points system to 100pts for a kill instead of 10 etc. Both those ended up as iconic games. Thre was alost always something - Ghosts was too 'Stale' and not innovative enough, Titanfall was the 'future', then came 3yrs of Innovation to movement, but the Community wanted to go back to 'traditional' Boots on the Ground MP.

Infinite Warfare was one of the highest disliked reveal trailer of all time but that was still a very successful game. Even when Vanguard released, the 'lowest' point for Many in CoD History, that didn't kill the franchise.

I play BO6 almost daily - at least just to do the daily Missions in Zombies/Warzone and a 15min GP game mission. Therefore it makes sense for me to pre-order BO7's Vault Edition as I'll no doubt play that daily too — even if just for 15-30mins....

@Ricky-Spanish Unfortunately (or Not depending n your perspective) the Seasonal Content, just like Warzone' is funded with a Free to Play Business Model - one that relies on selling Battle Passes (which are all Cosmetic, XP tokens and CoD point rewards) and Cosmetic Bundles - if you don't buy the Battle Pass or Bundles, you still get all the New Maps, Weapons, game play affecting content and cosmetics too with free events as well.

I thought Cel hading was pushing the limit of acceptability, but going full Cartoon is just ridiculous - its far too jarring for the artstyle of the maps and rest of the game. If they had done a Hollywood Action Movie version of Beavis and Butthead as if Hollywood were making a live action movie, the community would have been more tolerant - like they have been with decades now of CoD Cosmetics - more CoD games have been sold that sold Cosmetic Customisation (or loot box mechanics to get full customisation sets) than haven't - but they also sold DLC Map packs - 4 a year since World at War and Cosmetics came in with Black Ops 2. I do think the weight of more outrageous skins has increased and fewer and fewer Military style skins are in the Game today but I attribute that to them catering to what sells - just because I prefer more military style, if they don't sell as well, maybe because the main characters look 'military' so why buy more when you have decent free options.

I can see them sticking to their CoD Artstyle so not using Cel Shading or cartoon art. I can see them still making weird glowing, smoking, shiny, weird, unrealistic for a battlefield skins - the Vault Edition Character and weapon skins aren't exactly mil-sim style...

At the end of the day, The Series S is the XB1S of this gen - maybe will only offer 30fps HD graphics whilst the X offered higher Quality visuals and Frame Rates in a number of Games.

When you have a 1080p base image to upscale to 4k, you have 4x the information and detail to work with and 1080p still looks OK on a 4k screen - a bit soft but OK so FSR to boost to 4k for 60fps is not an issue if needed for Consistent 60fps but 540p-720p for a 1440p upscale on a 4k screen will look terrible so better to lock to 30fps.

Of course we don't know how ambitious they are going to be with this and what graphical tools they are using, RT GI or Nanite for example which can be expensive on 'processing' time when you only have 16.6ms per frame to do everything in compared to 2x that (33.3ms) for 30fps modes. You can spend 5ms on Ray Tracing when its less than 1/6th of your budget but nearly a 1/3rd maybe too much for ANY 60fps mode unless they bring RTGI quality down to reduce that time or find some way to 'optimise' it, if its fundamental (noalternative or fall back built in) then 30fps is not possible on that hardware. It may only take 3ms or less on faster hardware and/or with more 'cores' they can utilise.

Time will tell, if they do manage to get a 60fps option but I don't thnk people buy a Series S expecting total parity on Frame Rates, just like they don't expect Graphical parity - they just want Content Parity - the ability to play the same games and content as Series X, not miss out. The XB1X offered Graphical as well as frame rate improvements, including 60fps where the S was locked to just 30fps games.

@Banjo- Of course it is - the more 'platforms' you have to port to, the more time and money that takes. Xbox is NOT just the Console, its Microsofts Gaming Brand - hence 'Xbox' Meta and 'Xbox' Ally.

Now they can basically give you Windows 11 and not have those processes and 'Windows' desktop 'installed' on their Console if they wanted Full control, a 'locked' device that only 'vetted' apps like Steam or Epic are allowed. That's what their Xbox/Windows team have basically done with their new Win11 handhelds although these also have those other bits installed too so can switch to full Win11, but for their Console, don't install or allow full desktop, replace Xbox App with a 'home Screen and UI' but keep core Windows 11 from a Gaming perspective only - the game sees Windows 11 and DirectX API's its written for...

Point is, a Console is pretty much a PC in a single Chip - CPU & GPU combined together in one 'processor that reduces lag/latency between both CPU and GPU inherent in separate devices - more efficiency from 'less' as you also don't feed consoles with that much power for more efficient consumption, heat management and life expectancy. It has Some Custom design because it often has Audio processing separate or some 'bespoke' sector for controller or whatever to give Devs a 'Consistent' portion of CPU/GPU for gaming but need to 'port' to that OS and Hardware Specifically to maximise its quality/performance.

With Digital, it really doesn't or shouldn't matter what 'hardware' you have, if you own the game, you hould be able to play it - you bought a Licence to access the software, so with Windows PC often being used to make games and most release on PC, you should have no issue accessing your Library on any 'PC' or PC like device and it saves costs in porting and/or backwards compatibility issues...

I personallly don't want to see contrasting Art-styles in a game - Cel-shaded characters were bad enough, but cartoon art is definitely too far. The Beavis/Butthead skins, whilst they are so easy to spot and target, really clash with the rest of the games Aethestic. TMNT skins don't clash and I bet if they had 'humanised' Beavis & Butthead, made them in the same art-style as their standard characters, the community perhaps would be a bit more tolerant.

Its clear that BO7 will have 'unrealistic' (for a Military) looking skins/outfits. Much like BO6 had Brutus and Klaus Zombie skins with the Vault edition, the Vault edition of BO7 has some Cosmetic skins too. I still expect them to sell 'outrageous' skins and of course cross-overs (like Squid Game or TMNT) but I also don't expect to see ANY Cartoon 'skins'.

As BO6 has Cartoon Skins, inc Cel Shaded and not just the Characters, but the Weapon Blueprints and even Death Effects/tracers with very Comic/Cartoon style art, it does make sense to stop all carry forward into BO7 if they don't intend for those artstyles to return. Warzone though will still carry forward but that, like the Post Launch Seasonal Content is funded with a F2P type model. As such, they'll still need to sell Cosmetics and Battle Passes to pay for the F2P content.

I won't equip any Cel Shaded or Cartoon style cosmetics regardless and it doesn't really 'annoy' me to see them in my game - in fact those that do choose to equip often make it so much easier to spot them and kill them as they stand out so much. I see these as more Pay to Lose because they stand out so much - unlike the Terminator or Rose skins that blend in to dark areas very well...

People are still happy playing games on their Switch, PS4 or XB1 hardware but that didn't stop the next gen Consoles coming and 'selling' too.

I have no doubt that Series X and PS5 owners are 'content' with their access to games and 'tolerate' the level of Graphical Quality and Performance options - but the fact some have to choose between a higher Quality image or Frame Rates, having to forego certain features (like RT) for more Frames, the fact that some games are relying on FSR to get a '4k like' image but only running at 1080p or lower, the fact that even when they target 30fps, you still rely on DRS or FSR upscaling from 1440p or lower, still don't get the full RT or other high end Quality visual settings etc are also reasons SOME gamers would upgrade immediately a more powerful console releases.

I don't know what the Sales of PS5 Pro are, but I betits still selling so that indicates some would buy a Next gen today if they released one.

5-6yrs is still above average for a Consoles life cycle. No-one 'needs' to upgrade their Mobile Phone yet every year, new improved Phones release - of course the average person replaces their phone sfter about 3years. Last gen I replaced my Project Scorpio 'Day 1' XB1 with a Gears 4 XB1S after 3yrs and replaced that with a XB1X and 3yrs later, upgraded to a Series X. During the LONG 360 gen, I owned 4 different 360's - Launch, Elite, Slim and then a Slim with Kinect.

I don't believe Any Dev can create a brand new game that could NEVER have been made before because of Hardware limitations - Its all about the refinement and improvement. Not just resolution and/or Graphical detail with no pop-in and real time lighting for example, but things like AI to improve interaction with NPC's or improved Physics for improved behaviour, including destruction and particles interacting with environment, hair/cloth not clipping through solid objects etc.

Talking of AI, AI has become very important to gaming - DLSS is AI upscaling and frame generation and only the PS5 Pro has any AI cores built in. Like there was a 'need' to move to SSD's and Chips that could do RT and other features as these were taking off in the PC space, DLSS has gone from Strength to Strength and AI cores becoming more important, there is a 'need' to develop new Console Hardware to offer those.

@BaldB3lper78 The Lenovo Go will likely get the same Windows 11 OS at some point so will also benefit from a more optimised gaming OS than it currently has.

Other than specs and layout, the rest is pretty much the same - same Library. Unless of course you go for the SteamOS version of Lenovo which basically locks you to Steam and hope that every 'Windows' game plays nicely with the Proton Layer. You won't get your Play Anywhere Xbox games or Game Pass on Steam OS - its basically a 3rd Party Steamdeck.

The 'Xbox' branded RoG Ally is just the 'first' Handheld PC to have a 'new' Handheld version of Win 11 that doesn't boot up the 'full' Windows 11 suite for a more optimised and efficient OS for gaming. That is expected to come to other handhelds sometime next year.

Windows and Xbox are BOTH MS owned, both linked and why MS support PC like their Console. So you need a Windows PC if you want to 'benefit' from Game Pass and Play Anywhere games - not Steam or Steam OS. Steam is its OWN platform like Playstation or Switch so if you have no history on Steam, you'll have to start buying from Steam to have any games to play on Steam...

@Exerion76 You don't know that - it maybe running Windows, but its not running the FULL Windows as shuts off some unnecessary (for gaming) processes which in turn leaves more 'resources' for Gaming - it saves upto 2GB's of Memory which can now be assigned to gaming.

That is the 'point' about this device compared to all previous Windows Handheld - that Windows 'bloat' is far more impactful on low powered devices where every resource is extremely limited and power starved too.

It may not exactly match Steam OS, but it will be a LOT closer than it currently is and when it comes to your Lenovo Go in the future, you'll be able to compare and have an actual informed opinion...

@kmtrain83 A laptop may well be the better option and you can always use a Controller - it's just not as well 'optimised' for gaming specific and a bit more inconveneint to play 'on the go'.

The games options will be the same and you can always access the Xbox App too, if you sign into windows with your Xbox Microsoft account. It's just the 'convenience' and ergonomics of this handheld, along with the 'Xbox' and Windows 11 teams working together to create this Windows 11 'optimised for Handheld gaming' version coming first to this device.

Any PC currently offers the same Library and access so a Laptop may well be the more sensible route for your current situation than buying something more designed for gaming on the Go specifically - but cumbersome to use with a tiny touchscreen keyboard for any other functionality. All Windows PC's these days have the same option to play EVERY PC game available today on it, just the specs decide whether its a graphical showcase with excellent frame rates or low res low settings, choppy mess to play and everything in between as most have some 'GPU' Cores built in to their chips so it comes down to what is 'most' important to you for its use - if you intendto pretty much only use it for gaming 'anywhere' in one 'convenient' easy to use device, then the Handheld PC is 'best', want to do work or use the full versatility of windows to type emails, do any work etc, then a Laptop or Tablet maybe best. Tablets with a keyboard cover - like Surface pro or ipads are very portable but not 'great' for gaming spec wise....

Most 'Gaming' Laptops are designed more for playing at any desk near a plug socket than'playing 'untethered' anywhere. They are awkward to balance on your knees on a bus journey or train journey without a table to put a laptop on, and won't get much battery life in modern games with their separately powered GPU as well as CPU and cooling for everything. They are more 'portable' than a desktop, but not quite as portable as a Handheld device. Trackpads too are awful for gaming so you need a mouse if not using a Controller so you have to take additional items with you regardless to 'game' on the go but Handhelds are 'All in One' (Controller, screen and electronical Hardware) devices designed to be played 'Anywhere' - in bed, on the sofa, in the park, on the bus, in the waiting room of a Drs appointment, where ever you have 'time' to game regardless of where you are.

@norwichred To answer your first point, I can't help you with regards to streaming in Dubai but if they don't offer it, then its not going to let you play your 'entire' Console library. I don't know if Remote Play is an option, as in streaming direct from your Console like Playstation Portal offers, but if you can remote play to a laptop/desktop, that maybe your only option - other than maybe re-buying the PC versions of games you want to play.

You can download any 'Play Anywhere' Xbox title (over 1300 games are Play Anywhere) or if they are on Game Pass for PC too with your Game Pass Subscription - chances are you have 'numerous' games you can install and play without needing to spend any additional money (if you already Sub to GPU, you get Game Pass for PC, EA Access and Streaming (if available in your region).

If you want to play 'offline', you can always re-buy the PC version, just like you'd have to do with any other Handheld on the market. You don't get the Steam version with Play Anywhere so won't get the games on a Steamdeck, so won't get ANY Xbox games on that or Switch 2. Won't get your entire Library on any other PC but will get Play Anywhere and Game Pass PC games through 'Microsoft' on ANY PC, the exact same situation applies with this too.

The ONLY difference between all the other Handheld Windows PC's is that this doesn't boot the full Windows 11 but a Gaming Optimised version, doesn't boot to the full windows Desktop, but to the 'Xbox PC App' and its designed by Xbox/Windows team for Controller input - this will be coming to other PC handhelds in the future but this is the first.

Another aspect is that is uses Microsofts Controller layout in Full size to feel like an Xbox Controller, not a typical handheld with 70% scale controls and designed more for slim design than ergonomic comfort. But it is still a 'full' gaming PC and you don't expect your ENTIRE Xbox Library to be playable on a PC gaming rig. The fact you can play 'some' games thanks to Play Anywhere and Game Pass for PC is a 'bonus' - you won't get Spider-man or God of War on PC because you own a PS version, won't get them on a Xbox console at all, but can play them natively on a Xbox branded PC

@Fiendish-Beaver Steam games bought from steam are playable 'Natively' on a Steamdeck so you don't 'stream' to a steamdeck.

Xbox is NOT just the Console - Xbox is Microsofts Gaming Brand, their 'platform' on PC like Steam is its own Platform on PC. You don't get the 'Steam' versions of Xbox Play Anywhere PC titles, you get the Microsoft 'Xbox PC' version.

So if you have Xbox play anywhere games or those games are on Game Pass for PC, you can download and play because its part of the same 'ecosystem' if a slightly different version (as in its built for Windows PC's, not the Xbox Console). It's like getting the Series S or XB1 version if you play on that hardware instead of a Series X because the Series X version isn't 'optimised' for that hardware.

Because MS only merged their Xbox into Windows a decade ago and made 'Xbox' their entire Gaming brand - not just the Console, its not surprising 'legacy' games from before that are less likely to be play anywhere and many aren't even Back Compat with Series Hardware. Just like on a standard Windows PC, you can't play your Xbox console version of those games. However, you can stream Xbox games because of Stream your Own games, Game Pass Cloud streaming and of course Remote Play - if they weren't 'Play Anywhere' or not on Game Pass PC to download.

However, you also can 're-buy' most, if not all the Xbox games from the multitude of retailers - MS, Steam, Epic, Battlenet, GoG etc. Just like you'd have to buy again if you jumped to a Steamdeck or any other Handheld PC, windows laptop/desktops etc. The cheapest option of course is to Stream if you already 'own' those games, but you also have the option to play via Emulation and a LOT of old Console games from the 360/PS3 era backwards are on PC via emulation. More old Xbox games are playable that way than on a Series S/X via Backwards Compatibility.

You don't expect to play ALL your entire Xbox Library if you decide to move to a Gaming PC - inc the handhelds. The Only difference between this and other PC's is that MS have worked on Windows 1 with the Xbox team so that these more 'power limited' devices are better optimised for Gaming than running the full Windows 11 OS as all other Handhelds currently are. Its the Microsoft PC Xbox app UI essentially with a 'Optimised' Windows 11 OS designed for Controller input (unlike Windows) - but you can easily switch on the full Windows desktop if you choose - its NOT a Xbox Console, its an Xbox PC and plays the PC versions of games.

You can download or stream games like Indiana Jones or Starfield because they are Play Anywhere and on Game Pass and its all Microsoft owned platforms. Steam is Valve so you need to buy from Valve to play on their Platform regardless of hardware style. you can buy games from Steam, Epic, MS etc to play 'natively' on PC if a PC version ever released but if you don't want to 're-buy' and its not a Play Anywhere or Game Pass PC title, then you can stream from server or console to save having to re-buy a PC version.

I don't know how else to explain that this is still a Full PC, but Microsoft have 'Xbox' on PC, their own PC Platform with Windows/DirectX, their own Customers (Sony use Steam/Epic platform on PC and you won't get Spider-Man free on PC by buying it on PS. This is Microsoft trying to make their Windows 11 OS be much more efficient and suited for Gaming Handhelds than them making a Handheld console locked to 'Xbox'

It's what I was expecting - although I see a LOT of discourse online about the fact that it 'streams' your Xbox 'Console ONLY' games and so I've seen comments saying this is just a more expensive PS Portal or why not just buy a Steamdeck...

It seems many haven't really understood that this is a PC - albeit with a Xbox App 'boot' screen that turns off some Windows 11 processes to be more 'optimised' for gaming. You can't play your ENTIRE Xbox Library on any PC so why expect to on this? You can't play ANY of your Xbox Library on a steamdeck (out of the Box anyway).

Just because you don't get a 'PC' version or can't download via Game Pass for PC, doesn't mean you can't play those games at all - you can stream from a server in the cloud (Stream your Own games if available with that title) or from your Console (remote play - the ONLY option on a PS portal). Those are the cheapest option, but if you really want to play a game but NOT stream it, you also have another option - buy it again from any of the PC retailers inc MS, Steam, Epic, Battlenet, GoG etc. I'm sure that over 95% of the games on Xbox have a PC version.

Not only that, you can't play games like Spider-man, God of War, Horizon: Zero Dawn etc on your Xbox but can on an Xbox PC.

This is still a 'full' Windows 11 PC - no different from a Desktop or gaming Laptop. The 'only' difference is that instead of loading up the full Windows 11 on boot up, you boot into the Xbox App with numerous Windows 11 processes turned off by default to optimise specifically for 'gaming'. However, you can easily turn those processes on and open the full windows desktop.

Unlike a Steamdeck or dedicated Xbox/Playstation/Switch handheld, this is NOT a locked platform out of the box. Steamdeck maybe able to install windows to get Game Pass and Play Anywhere games, its not the 'default' .

As for price, even the X isn't that 'unreasonable' for a Gaming PC that isn't subsidised and locked to a single store, for a device that isn't locking content and Social gaming behind a Subscription pay wall. A Series X costs £500, requires you to own/buy a display to plug into it, requires at least a £60 a year Sub fee to play online and with friends, to play the FULL library of games/modes etc. So if you own a Series X for 6yrs, paying for Game Pass Core only just for Online gaming, that's £860. Yet if you buy a Handheld PC, its a Complete device (no display required), never have to pay for online access to play with friends and because there isn't a monopoly on store fronts, can also shop around to get the best prices on games...

@Ricky-Spanish As I said, I think its the 'best' Halo game that 343 hasactually made. Its the closest to that OG Halo experience, that first time you land on the planet and get to explore. Its not quite as varied in terms of environments, but the game-play loop is more varied and the big spaces aren't as lifeless or devoid of activities.

So from my perspective, I'd be OK if they took Halo:Infinite and 'expanded' it so it wasn't ALL on the same planet to add more Biome diversity. I felt a LOT of the Story Missions were extremely Linear and very reminiscent of traditional Bungie Campaigns. There are still all those corridors that lead into enclosed but big areas you need to clear and/or complete objectives - similar to the Library or even the opening Ship mission in Halo:CE.

So from my perspective, this is the 'closest' to a Traditional Halo campaign from 343i. I'd be OK if they gave us another Halo with that same more 'wide-linear' approach, filled those areas with numerous other activities. I would prefer more biomes but I think its the most Halo game 343i have made.

I couldn't care less about Halo MP myself. I did try H:I, but maybe only played a few matches to see if things had changed, but there are so many other FPS games I prefer to play their MP modes.

I don't think Halo will ever be as 'groundbreaking' as it felt back in the OG Xbox days and even in the 'early' 360 days, it was the 'king' but then Call of Duty, Battlefield, Medal of Honour and numerous other FPS games have arrived. I don't want a 'OG' era Halo as that is extremely dated. Halo:CE on the MCC is not a 'good' game by modern standards and if they released Halo today (for the first time), it would be a FLOP.

I really don't want a dated Halo game, I want them to evolve, to innovate, to take inspiration from other games that 'rebooted' because their 'old' formula is extremely dated. I don't think Tomb Raider would have been a success if they told that story in a very linear and 'traditional' Tomb Raider style. I don't really think God of War would have succeeded if they had kept the same old game-play loop. I really want Halo to 'evolve' but still keep the Lore, the iconic weaponry and enemies, Master Chief focused and of course iconic elements of 'Halo' but much more modern, gritty and that extends to the Story too.

Gears isn't the same under the Coalition, they have taken the 'grit', the War, the brutality and darkness that backdrop of War delivers. But it seems that Different Devs from the OG creators will never have ALL the pieces that OG fans may expect because they want to make 'their' game and/or change a 'piece' or two to try and appeal to a wider audience or 'improve' upon an existing system - Uncharted for example got much wider and larger 'open' areas than being very linear like the first and Far Cry is not the same game today as the first was - not by a LONG way. GTA isn't the same now - that was a completely different game to play so after decades, as Halo is, I really do think it needs 'rebooting' more than it needs to go back to 'traditional' because I think if they did that, it would 'flop' in todays market, it would seem 'very' dated and extremely 'limited' - even if it is a Graphical showcase.

@nomither6 Yeah - AI team-mates can be extremely frustrating. I didn't find Gears 3 as much of an issue as the first. It seemed no matter what instruction I tried to give, He would always roadie rush the Boss or get his head taken off by Krill. I tried to command him to stay back or go back behind cover but no matter what I tried, it was the bad AI that caused me to fail time and time again.

Resident Evil 5 was another bad AI companion game, the amount of times I failed because the AI was so bad it was ridiculous. Give them a decent gun, but don't take away the pistol, they'll only use the pistol. Need them to walk around a box on a conveyor belt, they can't...

Few games have ever really frustrated me with AI companions - but Gears of War 'end boss' and numerous sequences in RE5 that really annoyed me. I had no issue completing every Gears of War 'Solo' and on my first playthrough - I hate playing 'co-op' until I've already beaten the game Solo as I have my 'own' agenda (explore everywhere, collect everything, take my time, listen to all dialogue etc and get very annoyed if others talk during any dialogue or rush ahead, rush from objective to objective, skip cut scenes etc. Therefoe I like to beat a game Solo before I will play co-op, but Gears was the ONLY game I beat co-op because it was frustrating me too much trying to beat it Solo. I think I've only managed once since beating it, but still had to revive my AI companion multile times and felt he was more a liability than a help.

I guess I didn't beat 2 or 3 on 'Insane' difficulty, I don't play on the easiest modes, but with AI controlling and its an instant fail if they die, I don't feel its worth even trying. I wouldn't want to carry 'Noobs' through a Gears campaign on Hard Difficulty, let alone insane, but Noobs at least tend to play 'better' than AI.

If anything, the AI in these 'old' games is one area I really think they need to 'update' and improve.

I actually haven't completed it that many times 'solo' because of the AI controlling your partner in the 'final' Boss fight. That invariably led to him making some stupid play, going down very easily or even being outright killed - thus ending any opportunity for me to beat the game.

The first time I beat it was when I invited my Son to play 'co-op' and beat the game easily and then went on to beat the game multiple times at various difficulty settings. I don't know how many times in total I've beaten it, but I'd imagine its somewhere between 5-10 times now which for me is quite a LOT as I tend not to bother playing games that I have beaten, that I know how the game ends. I tend to gravitate more to unfinished games I want to finish before I'll consider replaying. Some of those are the 2nd (remastered) version, otherwise it would likely be less than 5x.

I don't even know if I'll bother playing the Reloaded version - even though I got a Free code for it and have it pre-installed. I still remember the majority of the story and game-play moments so don't need to keep playing to find out what comes next...

@Ricky-Spanish My favourite Halo's are probably 2 or 3. I wasn't that enamoured by Reach or ODST and felt (maybe wrongly) that Bungie weren't really interested in making Halo but made these under Obligation. Both perhaps were good MP games, but I've never liked Halo's MP Combat and Reach of course had Forge which I think is what really made that game much more popular.

I have only played Halo for its Single Player Campaigns. To me, Multi-player was a 'bonus' add-on to try and sell Gold subscriptions and just too 'old school arena' style and floaty for my taste.

I prefer the more 'Far Cry' approach because it at least fills those zones with things to find, things to do etc. Halo:CE had wide Linearity but maybe you'd come across a small group of enemies, but more often than not, the world felt more deserted and less rewarding to go off the 'quickest' path to the next Objective. Now, you'll find things to do and/or fight

@Valhura Maybe in your opinion, but I'd rather play H:I than Halo:CE, Halo 4 or 5, as well as ODST and Reach. Halo 5 had copy/paste boss fights and the worst Halo Campaign of ALL time in my Opinion. It was so bad, I thought that the devs had NO idea what a Halo game is - H:I is much closer to the Original trilogy era Halo than ANY 343 era Halo game and definitely the best from 343i to date - not saying much I know as Bungie's 2 & 3 are far superior...

@Ricky-Spanish I disagree - I enjoyed the Halo:Infinite Campaign - I completed everything there was to do including collecting all the Skulls and think the Story and game-play loop was far more engaging than Halo 5 or even Halo 4. Halo 4 'looked' very impressive for its time, but was very brief and left me unsatisfied. Halo 5 felt more like a poor 'spin-off' than a Main Halo game with very repetitive boss fights.

Halo: Infinite reminded me a LOT of the first real mission in Halo:CE when you reach the Planet. That much more 'open' (even if Linear) story, the freedom to explore the vast area and tackle objectives in any order etc felt more 'rewarding' in H:I because the area wasn't as empty or devoid of things to find, enemies to fight etc.

Of course each to their own, but my biggest complaint with Halo was the time it took to release, the 'misleading' in-game trailers that led us to believe it would be a 'next gen' visual treat, instead it probably looked more like a 360 era game remastered and it lacked basic features that were promised - co-op, forge etc. Then when it did release, they couldn't deliver Content quick enough and/or get those promised features out - co-op I believe cancelled. Forge is there now and by all accounts, the MP is a lot of fun today, but I don't enjoy Halo's MP.

I also prefer the newer Tomb Raider's with their more Open design and RPG mechanics than the more linear and 'traditional' design. I see Halo trying to 'evolve' to compete with modern Single Player Campaigns as a 4-5hr 'Linear' story doesn't tend to go down well with the majority - although I do know a portion of the market would prefer 'short' campaigns due to their time limitations...

It's great that they are opening up to allow more 3rd Party Retailers & Games. Ofcourse you normally sign into your Xbox/Windows on boot-up and this is set up primarily for Microsoft and their Ecosystem, but unlike consoles, you can load up 3rd Party Apps/platforms .

What you have to remember is that this is Microsofts UI and OS. Whilst it maybe able to see what games you have installed and show them in the 'Xbox' app, that doesn't mean you'll see all the steam games you haven't installed and can't manage your steam accounts/games without loading up Steam & signing in.

All the 'coming soon', ready to install,, or other games not installed but displayed, all link to MS/Xbox Store versions - not Steam. If you want to compare prices, you have to load up steam and search for the game because you are on a 'Xbox/Windows' UI/OS not Steam etc to have access to that account and stored Lbrary.

You need to load up steam or whatever other gaming apps you have to browse their library, buy games and install them but once installed, can be accessed through the Xbox UI. Its possible to have multiple 'versions' of the same game - Indy (MS PC & Steam), each with its own save status/progression.

@FEmblemFan Onefactor you are NOT considering is that a PC is an upfront cost but consoles require a Subscription for full functionality and ability to play all games/modes etc. Without Game Pass Core/PS+, you have a more limited gaming experience.

Even if its just £5 a month, that's £60 a year or an additional £300 over 5yrs - however, it can cost more than that if you just buy a month at a time. There is no charge for these on PC.

So lets look at the cost of a Series X/PS5 or even a PS5 Pro + 5yrs of PS+/Game Pass Core and the cost of these PC Handhelds. I think Nintendo Switch requires a Nintendo Online Subscription too (although I haven't owned a Nintendo since the Wii to know for sure) but without these Subs you can't play some games and others have the bulk of content behind that paywall.

If I spend £900 on a RoG Xbox Ally X for example, I don't have to spend any money at all to play games online, to play with friends etc. Buy a Series X for £500 + £60 a year for 6-7yrs and it will cost about the same. A PS5 Pro is £700 and so just 4yrs of PS+ would make it more expensive.

There are more 'costs' involved with gaming on Console compared to PC but the Hardware is cheaper as its subsidised by Subscriptions and a Monopoly on the Digital store. The initial outlay on PC maybe a bit higer, but services and games are generally cheaper as well as the multitude of choice of retailers too...

@kmtrain83 all I wassaying is that both devices have a1080p screen but neither will likely target a full 1080p in the newest AAA games. Like the Series S 'targets' 1440p where the X targets 4k, hat doesn't mean either will play EVERY game at those resolutions. The same goes for Switch but as these devices should have NO issue playing older games at the full 1080p. All have the same Screen so it just comes down how well they each run the games and I doubt the Switch 2 will run games at 'higher' res than these - although soon we'll have Indiana Jones to compare on Switch 2 and these Handhelds.

The cheaper handheld is like the Series S so targeting lower res. The X is like the Series X - offers a bit more power and features, but at a premium price. The more affordable model is expected, like the Series S, to be the more popular choice because its more affordable but can't match the 'X' version. The Switch 2 has a 1080p screen but I doubt you'll be getting more than 720p from Indy for example.

Screen resolution and the Resolution a game runs at are two different things. As they all have a 1080p screen but different Hardware inside, that will lead to differences in the quality of the Graphics.

@Millionski The New Chip is NOT basically the same - its the next Gen with an AI NPU built in - something the previous 'X' did not. It also has a lot more material and FULL Size controls, rumble built into the triggers and its also a Licenced product too so split revenue.

We have also seen that hardware isn't getting 'cheaper' as all the other costs rise - the cost of raw materials, the cost of the manufacturing process (higher electric or fuel costs), higher wages, higher overheads, higher shipping costs etc etc which increases faster than they can 'reduce' costs.

One way was to reduce the Chip size - going from 90nm to 45nm is a BIG saving in size, but if you already use 4nm, there isn't much scope to reduce the chip size, which in turn helps reduce the power requirements and heat/cooling needs. That's why you saw 'Slim' console come out 'cheaper' - because they could shrink things down to use far less raw materials so costs reduced.

You aren't going to see 'dramatic' chip size changes so they cannot 'reduce' the cost but because Silicon is 'high demand' and costs rising, that year old+ chip is more expensive to produce than it was - there 'profit' margin shrinks and shrinks until they lose money or raise prices.

The Ally X has a Z1 Extreme chip - the exact same chip as in the OG RoG Ally. The new Xbox versions both have a Z2 chip - the base (White) version has AMDs Z2 A processor whilst the X (Black Version) has AMD's AI Z2 A Extreme processor. the Xbox X has double the RAM and Faster too.

I don't really know how much different Z2 is from Z1 but the OG Ally X certainly doesn't have the AI NPU built in.

I can't say f they've managed to build the new Xbox Ally X for a similar cost to the OG X, despite the differences, but it doesn't seem that 'unreasonable' considering the newer Chip, faster RAM, full size controls and 'bigger' form factor (more materials) and of course 'Xbox' Branding/Licencing too!

@kmtrain83 And all the RoG Ally models come with a 1080p 120hz VRR display too. 720p is basically the same as 1440p on a 4k display is and BOTH will upscale to fill the Screen so I still don't understand why you think it will have 'lesser' graphics when it may well be running at higher res and graphical settings than the Switch 2. Both may have a 1080p Screen, the X version may target 1080p whilst the basic Xbox Ally is targeting 720p but Switch 2 (in handheld mode) is 600p and lower graphical settings, its certainly not going to look 'better' on their 1080p screen.

@GeeEssEff I don't think the 'Nextbox' will appeal to a Steam player just because it has access to steam. Its also a Microsoft Branded device with emphasis on the Microsoft ecosystem and I bet that if Asus, Lenovo, MSi etc are making Xbox branded devices, they'll also have more Generic equivalents without the Xbox License for similar, if not 'less' money as they aren't paying for the Xbox branding.

Why can't Asus make a 'Console' like Form Factor PC or even a Steam OS based 'console' with similar specs? Why buy an 'Xbox RoG Ally' when Lenovo may offer a Steam based PC so get the Steam optimisation/verification in your Steam games more like a Steamdeck - which is what MS will do for Games on their Xbox branded Handheld/consoles. You want the best Steam experience on a Handheld, you buy the Steamdeck or a steam OS Handheld PC.

If people do buy Xbox hardware, buy Xbox games through steam its still making Microsoft money - maybe not as much, but still better than them not buying their Hardware or Software at all. Will make more money off of Xbox branded products if Steam gamers decide that Xbox is the best, most affordable way to play Big Screen on their TV and may well lead to some additional sales of Controllers and games overall.

@BaldB3lper78 Its a PC so can play games that you download - but if you own games that are on your 'Xbox' Console that are NOT Play Anywhere (so never received a PC version), not available on PC or you don't want to 'buy' a PC version of, then you can Stream from a Server - Stream your Own Games OR on Game Pass Cloud or Stream direct from your Console via Remote Play (the same way Playstation Portal works).

It's a 'windows' PC so like a Windows PC, you can download Windows PC games and play Locally - but not all your Xbox Library is Play Anywhere and some may not be on PC at all. As you can't download and play 'Xbox' versions, its only the PC version, you either have to buy the PC version (double dip) if you want to download or hope that its available in Game Pass for PC.

Streaming just means that you can play games you already own without needing to 'rebuy' for that hardware, a way to play your existing library of games. You wouldn't expect to get Spider-Man or Uncharted etc on PC just because you bought those games on Playstation - but maybe would stream/remote play them on a Handheld rather than buy again from Steam for example.

I guess it makes sense in a very unstable economic market globally. Some countries maybe a bit more stable than others but can change quickly.

They can't set a price then see some costs going up and up, then have to adjust the price before launch. Pre-order at $900 but due to external issues they had no control over, they have to raise the price to $950+, that's going to be a disaster. It seems that they 'expect' to release at $900, but are not very optimistic that the 'global' market will settle or stabilise to commit to a price despite how close to release it is.

All it takes is for some 'cost' - even just the price of fuel - can impact the Cost to manufacture and Distribute globally. Raw materials go up, as do the cost to ship over the world - and that's just 1 cost, but add rising costs to silicon and other raw materials, to labour and overheads, to advertising/marketing etc etc.

MS got into the Console business because their PC gaming business was so 'niche' and required expensive hardware that prevented the majority from having access - they made the Xbox to bring PC games to a more affordable market AND make Windows/DX12 a 'standard' that Devs had to adopt to make/release games on their console. 25years later and you don't need a £2k PC to play Doom, it will play on a $300 console, on a $500 Handheld PC. Gaming PC's, even if they only run games at up to 1080p and 30fps is 'standard' for most games, its still an affordable option that was once only the domain of Subsidised Consoles (although these made their money back by monopolising Digital sales and enforcing a Subscription for the full access and features set of that Hardware.

Most people that will buy an Xbox branded PC or Console is because they have a history and library with that brand and want to be in their 'ecosystem' primarily. If you are mostly a Steam player, well they have Handhelds better suited and 'each' including the Steamdeck can be used to play Xbox Play Anywhere and Game Pass games too. Why not buy a Lenovo Go or whatever Handheld PC comes with the Steam OS.

Steam games aren't going to be verified for Xbox PC's, like Xbox will verify their games and have 'optimised' for the Xbox Handheld PC games - which also adds another 'reason' to buy from MS on an XBOX branded device - its not just 1 reason but multiple can add-up.

To go back to your Black Myth Dilemma. If you only had an Xbox for the Big Screen and considered getting a Handheld PC for the times you can't use your console but have an opportunity to play, then Play Anywhere becomes far more important right now.

25yrs ago, there was a need to make an 'affordable' Console that could play PC games so MS could bring their games to a much bigger Market as well as bring very PC centric games to Console. 25yrs later, you don't need to spend $2k to play Doom or Fallout, you can play on a $300-500 handheld (Steamdeck or PC). So their 'need' to make affordable hardware, to ensure Windows/DX12 become established gaming standards, to be able to 'sell' their games is unnecessary - not say that they 'won't', but that they don't really need to as they have the 'Software' OS and API's that are required to play their games. Boot into windows, you've already booted into Xbox...

@Fiendish-Beaver MS will likely 'leave' the Console space in the near future - if not this gen, next. However, I still think they'll have Xbox branded Hardware available - even if they don't have their own. Surface continues despite the fact that there are numerous third party hardware that do the same thing - sometimes 'cheaper' too for similar specs. But MS still continue to make Hardware and their Controller is arguably one of the most popular too. They make Headsets as well, but have a LOT of Competition.

Point is, MS may well make their own 'Xbox' hardware - which could become more an Xbox PC than Xbox Console even if it has a console like UI and form factor. MS will likely count the RoG Xbox Ally as part of their 'Hardware' and will make money (due to the Xbox Licencing and trademarks - let alone their OS and licence that every customer 'buys' (included in the price).

They don't necessarily 'need' their own Console - just need to attract people to 'their' platform (whether on Cloud, PC). With affordable PC's, they may not be able to 'compete' as all the Xbox games release on PC anyway. Why spend $500+ on a Console and another $400 on 5yrs+ of Subs to play online and that doesn't have any 'exclusives' when they can buy a PC that plays all of Xbox as well as some of Playstation games and thousands of other games too for around the same cost - if not less.

Series S/X haven't flown off the shelf this gen and a LOT of PC gamers aren't buying a Xbox Console to play Console versions of the games they play on PC. PC gamers have NO reason to buy Xbox today so why is that going to change next gen? Why will steam be that detrimental when PC gamers have exactly that same choice - yet Game Pass and their PC base are showing more growth than Console.

Cross-play is good - but its not the same. In Call of Duty, I have friends on PC/PS hardware linked to my CoD friends - but unless they actually play CoD at the SAME time, I have no idea if they are even online. They could be playing something but I can't invite them to play CoD because it shows them as not 'online' in CoD. Of course if they do decide to play CoD, then I can see them in my CoD friends list to invite, but until then, you don't know who is online and/or playing the games you play together.

Yes its 'better' than it was, but you also have some that choose to turn Cross-play off because of all the Cheaters on Steam (and yes Steam is the preferred platform due to how easy it is to create many accounts with the same phone number/email address to get round the Cheating bans) particularly or PC in general as its much easier to cheat, to Mod games to your advantage....

@Fiendish-Beaver All I meant was that pre-orders can go live a week before release for example so EVERYONE has the SAME opportunity to pre-order to get their device on Day 1.

It doesn't matter if pre-orders go live 20days or 60days 'before' day 1, as you still have exactly the same opportunity to get the device on October 16th. As long as they notify us when 'pre-orders' are due to go live, it really doesn't matter if its 1 week, 1 month or 1 year in advance, you still can't get it before the Day 1 release.

Its no different from waiting for Shops to open to be first in line on Day 1 or first in line to 'pre-order' the day they go live. No point worrying about stock limits when NO-ONE can pre-order yet, when its still weeks away from being available to 'buy'! Pre-orders tend to ensure you'll get the device on Day 1 where turning up to buy maybe won't be successful. Pre-orders don't get the 'device' before Day 1 so you'll still have to wait. Pre-ordering - even a 'week' before isn't leaving things to last minute...

@Fiendish-Beaver well you can't secure a 'pre-order' until they go live and won't get any 'sooner' than Oct - therefore it doesn't really matter if pre-orders only go live a week before release as 'everyone' has the same opportunity to pre-order that day as they do if pre-orders went live today.

Regardless of what day they do go live, that still doesn't mean you'll not be disappointed if Demand exceeds Supply, if you aren't 'lucky' to get one with your preferred retailer, due to demand and/or queueing etc. People didn't get their Day 1 Series/Playstation consoles because 'pre-orders' sold out extremely quickly...

I'm looking forward to getting my RoG Xbox Ally X when it releases in October.

@Fiendish-Beaver All I was saying is that if you are coming from 'Xbox' into PC, then chances are you have NO library or History with Steam. They won't have friends, achievements or a Library and see Steam as an option to play games they never could on Xbox.

The point I'm trying to make is that Xbox branded products are more to attract Xbox Console gamers onto the PC. Its not about attracting Steam owners to buy 'Xbox' branded products - unless they want to get Game Pass to play New releases, like CoD, Fallout, Doom etc Games they'd usually buy on Steam. Steam gamers maybe better off with a 'different' PC Handheld or steamdeck, one that runs Valve's OS instead of a Microsoft Windows/Xbox OS.

Most 'Xbox' gamers aren't buying Xbox games on ANY platform as they play via Game Pass and then if they do decide to 'keep', will be much more likely to buy the Xbox version. Steam will likely be for those 'few' games they can't play on Xbox because they had NO history/experience on Steam and this is their 'introduction'...

@GeeEssEff I never said it would be a 'Major' reason but it, along with Achievements, Friends list, Game Pass and Game Pass Subscriber discounts, convenience etc. Play Anywhere only benefits gamers who do play over multiple 'different' devices - maybe switch back and forth between a 'Console' and PC. But if you only play on the one Hardware then play Anywhere is pointless to you.

It - along with other features/reasons add-up too. Maybe Play Anywhere isn't a major reason but your friends and Achievements are - Play Anywhere is just another bonus on top. Its an 'advantage' if you play on BOTH Xbox and PC and want cross-progression and/or don't want to buy it twice.

@kmtrain83 How can you say it has 'lesser' graphics than the Switch 2 when the Switch 2 doesn't have many of the same games. I don't think Indiana Jones when that releases on Switch 2 will look/run better.

Switch 2 is locked to Nintendo so Only games Nintendo are willing to have released on their Hardware, their own games too make up a decent chunk, but most AAA games won't release on Switch 2, at least not the same day as PC. PC also has a much larger Library and the vast majority will run very well because they were built to run on older hardware. In terms of Cost/library size, the Switch 2 is far more expensive.

That 'difference' in cost is negligible if not worth paying if you want to play modern AAA games as not all will release on Switch 2, let alone day/date. You may have to wait a year for a dedicated port.

I'm not saying you shouldn't consider a Switch 2, but its not the same thing. Switch 2 maybe cheaper, but requires a Sub fee for certain features/games so ends up costing more over time for the 'full' functionality/features and playable games (some games require a Sub to play) but PC's don't so could work out cheaper over time!

@Fiendish-Beaver Black Myth Wukong is NOT a new game - even if it is 'new' for Xbox. That's like me saying AoE4 is cheaper on Xbox than it is to pre-order on PS5 because its not 'New' on the Xbox Platform. They aren't selling a year old game at Day 1 prices anymore...

Black Myth doesn't need to be 'on sale' specifically, its had a price reduction now its not a New release so its cheaper. Its likely cheaper on PS5 too now/

I know that PC is 'generally' cheaper and of course never need to pay for Online - which I think is the bigger point. You won't buy Call of Duty or whatever other Online based game on Xbox when buying on Steam will not require a Subscription fee adding another £60+ to the cost to play for a year. I made that point earlier, but I can see MS dropping that charge for that very reason - unless they insist that Steam App requires Online to access.

Some games they probably can save - but that's where Consumer choice is actually permitted, its not 'anti-consumer' unlike the Current way Consoles are structured. EU law may well dictate that Platform holders cannot have a 'monopoly' on their Hardware - that they have to offer 'alternatives' for Consumers. But that doesn't mean that Microsoft won't 'compete' or have some features or benefits to buying from them that Xbox gamers expect/want - things like Achievements and building up their score can be enough for SOME.

For MOST buying an Xbox Console//PC, its because they are invested in the Xbox ecosystem, not Steam. They probably have NO steam games due to being strictly Console based so Steam is more 'supplemental' to play the 'few' games that they want to play but haven't (yet) released o their Hardware. Its more a way to get 'Playstation' games on their Hardware when Sony refuse to release on ANY MS platform.

Yes of course if Sony do bring 'Spider-Man' or Uncharted to Xbox (after all, these are now Multi-plat), then those games will be expensive, the 'Day 1' price as its Day 1 for that hardware - but old on Steam/PS platforms so 'cheap' - even if not on sale!

@Dimey Having gone through the list, my point still stands. The majority, if not ALL Xbox First Party games released since they introduced Play Anywhere a decade ago - and I mean the games they actually published, not the games they acquired after release - like Doom: Eternal for example, are Play Anywhere. If you chose to buy on Disc, you chose not to buy a 'Play Anywhere' version but all the Xbox releases had Play Anywhere if you chose to buy Digitally!

ALL your Xbox games are still playable on these Handheld PC's - either by Streaming from a Server or directly from your Console via Remote Play - the ONLY way you can play Playstation games on the go at all is via Remote Play.

Microsoft have NO control over 3rd Party Publishers/Devs to ensure that they too offer Play Anywhere but as a Publisher and the Platform holder, they obviously support their own feature, unless it doesn't release on both...

From my research Halo MCC is not - but released before 'Play Anywhere' was introduced as were many Xbox first Party releases, Forza Motorsport 7 and Gears 5 (although the MP component is Play Anywhere)