Kevw2006

@theduckofdeath It was both, the PC version was brought forward from the original date while the PS version was delayed slightly at the same time.

@BacklogBrad I don't disagree with what you're saying, at the moment they have the luxury of that choice and they are currently in the position where they dont need to rely on a sub service l. However, what he is speaking about here is a future where they don't have that choice and the only means they have of success is getting having their games added into a sub service no matter how good their game is. He means becoming even more reliant on the platform holder for success than they already are, he is specifically making his comments in to a response about a subscription based future, not the current environment.

@BacklogBrad That's not what he's saying at all. Basically as the platform holders MS and Sony have ultimate control over what games release on Game Pass or PS Plus. It's simply not possible for all games to be released on these so MS and Sony can pick and choose which games do.
If sub services become the dominant way that consumers access their games then any games that aren't released into the sub service is doomed to failure. You already see a number of people saying that they will wait for a game to release on Game Pass if it's not already releasing on GP at launch and that could start to happen a lot more often, potentially causing a lot less sales for a lot of games.

@themightyant That's true about the early access, however the full PC release was still early August compared to early September on PS. The PS version was due to release on the same date as PC in August but was then delayed to September.

@Kaloudz Technically Baldur's Gate 3 never had a multi-plat release as it released on PC first, then on PS5 a few weeks after and then on Xbox a further few weeks after that. I don't buy into the theories that the PS release was originally delayed to coincide with Starfield and assume that it just required some further optimisation, and this was likely also required on Xbox.
It's also worth bearing in mind that as yet they still have not fixed the original split screen issue and the reason it was able to finally release was due to MS allowing it to release without split screen on the series S. The good news though is that they have stated that all users will benefit from work they did to optimise for Series S.

@BaldBelper78 All brands have their loyal supporters, let's not pretend that Xbox is any different. The Xbox fridges and toaster are a thing after all.

@Sifi First party exclusives may give a console a selling point but in reality they are only a small piece of the puzzle. There are only ever a small handful of first party games release on any console in a year compared to the masses of third party games that release and of that small handful maybe only one or two at moat may actually appeal to you.
Just look at the sales figures for any first party game and the sales never come anywhere near the install base. The same applies on game pass too, just looking at the figures less that half of game pass subscribers have even bothered to download Starfield for "free". I played over 150 games on my PS5 last year and only a tiny percentage of those will have been first party so I think PS5 users will be doing just fine.

@cburg From reading through the comments it's the people that ARE paying attention to the long game that think they will eventually move away from consoles.

Given that Phil Spencer revealed that Microsoft considered pulling out of the console market during the Xbox One days and he had to convince them to remain you can never say never. It seems more unlikely these days though but they do seem to be on a major push towards cloud gaming so I think that they may end up going all in on cloud once the tech and infrastructure is stable enough.

Automatic upload is something that should always be disabled by default and need to be manually enabled. I class myself as being pretty tech savvy and checking for captures being automatically uploaded is not something I would instantly think to check for when I've bought a new console so I can imagine that there will be a lot of people out there that won't have even been aware it was a thing.

@OldGamer999 I think that releasing games on other platforms and then making subsequent sequels exclusive would have the opposite effect and bring a lot of hate to MS/Xbox. Out of all of the exclusive games that have been announced following acquisitions the only one that doesn't sit well with me is Hellblade 2, precisely for that very reason. Making it a business strategy wouldn't be a good look.

@Kaloudz The free trial is being expanded to also include the second expansion, Stormblood. I'm not sure when that is happening but the base game and Heavenward is a pretty sizeable amount of content. They did streamline the base ARR main story to remove a lot of filler when the last expansion released and I haven't played through the streamlined story bit it should still be fairly sizable.

@Sakai So only people with a positive view of a game are allowed to continue to post on articles about a game, and anyone that was disappointed can only post their views once or twice and after that are being "selfish"?
Imagine someone had just got an Xbox for their Christmas and are looking for games to play so they come on this site and read this article about Starfield winning an award so are intrigued. If they then go read the comments and it's only positive comments that are on the article they will be seeing a biased reflection of public opinion. You may not like it but it's important that the comments are allowed to remain balanced and show a true reflection of what public opinion is. No one is forcing you to read those negative opinions, it is fairly easy to spot the tone of a post from a quick glance so you can choose whether to read the remainder of the post or not.

@Sol4ris That's a very good point, maybe that's what was contained in the 2% that wasn't released.

@Sifi All valid points if you completely ignore the fact that MS (and many other publishers) also charge £70 for first party games, and MS also recently increased the price of GP by an equivalent amount while giving nothing more in return. Unless you consider being able to pay for the privilege of accessing 'day one' first party games a few days early an added bonus.
The moral of the story is all businesses are scummy and want our money, they just have different ways of bleeding it out of us.

I don't see any problem with this, provided that the ads don't intrude on gameplay. Imagine being in the middle of an important cut scene and suddenly an ad kicks in. Or in the middle of a multiplayer game and an ad starts playing, some games will boot you out for less than 30 seconds of inactivity.

@Kaloudz Windows Central have retracted that statement and said they don't have 100% confirmation on exclusivity. They say it's probably likely but are surprised that MS haven't announced it as exclusive.

@JoyfulFire There wasn't a third, Forza won two awards.

@Romans12 Okay but let's not pretend that Microsoft are a trillion dollar company because of their efforts in gaming. They are a trillion dollar company because they hold virtual monopolies in other lucrative areas. It's only because they are a trillion dollar company that they can operate the way they do in gaming.

@libersolis I'm still leaning towards no on that, but only just. Comments like them wanting game pass to be on Sony and Nintendo consoles suggest that they could be looking into pulling out of the console market, however I fully expect there to be a next gen Xbox console. Past that I'm not so sure, although I'm not so sure there will necessarily be a PS7 as a traditional console as we know them either.

@Romans12 Console sales may not be Microsoft's priority at the moment but you cannot say that they don't matter. Do you honestly think that is the Series S|X sales were less than say 5 million throughout it's lifetime we would see another Xbox console? I've said this many times but you don't spend millions researching, developing and marketing a product and then simply not care if no one buys it.

@LX_FENIX Responses like that aren't intended to change the review that's left. It's more for the potential buyer that's reading through reviews benefit, and them trying to explain the negative review to try and stop any more being left for those reasons. I'm not sure it ever has the intended effect though.

Moving from GoW to GoW should be an easy transition 😂

@MrMagic The post they put out is carefully worded and only talks about hours per player and avoids any mention on player numbers. Usually when there's no reference to player numbers it only means one thing...

@Carck Isn't there a requirement to have a game in your library on steam to be able to leave a review? If so, regardless of whether they own consoles, why would they care about it being on PS if they own it on steam?

@Carck Why would Steam users care about it being on PS though? They can just play it on PC.

@Goj Curiosity mostly. I'm a big TWD fan and thought the concept sounded interesting.

I bought the game with some pretty low expectations and my thoughts were pretty much spot on.

My biggest complain would be that it plays like a highlight reel of TWD moments and skips a lot of the narrative in between that makes those moments make sense.

@Sol4ris I already stated my issue is with people attacking devs and calling them lazy when they dare to say anything negative about the Series S. The Series S is no doubt a great machine with a number of positives that serves its purpose well. I have no doubt that Microsoft will be happy with how it has performed.

However, it does also have it's negative points too and there are fanboys out there that blindly refuse to accept these and attack any developers that mention them.

There are Devs that have come forward and said that they have had no issues developing for the Series S, which is great, and there are others that have come out and said it has caused them some additional problems. Whenever this happens people come out and blame the devs for having a problem because others have managed okay with it but everyone's experience is different. For a loose example I completed Spider-Man 2 start to finish without experiencing any bugs or crashes, it was one of the most flawless new releases I've played this generation. There are others out there that have experienced bugs and crashes, with some even considering it unplayable. Should their opinions be considered invalid because my experience was flawless? Is my opinion more important because my experience was flawless? Not at all. Every experience is just as valid as the other, positive or negative.

Haha I did wonder if you may say that about my toaster comment. That comment was in no way referencing the Series S and was purely referring to outdated PCs 😂

@Sol4ris Nothing strange about it at all. You are aware that minimum requirements are a thing on PC, right? Developers can choose the spec that they scale down optimization for. There is no mandate that ALL PC games must scale down to be be able to be played on glorified toasters, they are free to develop how they want.
Same as with Steam Deck, there is no mandate that ALL games that release on Steam must also be compatible with Steam Deck and maintain feature parity.
I don't even know why you brought up the Switch as the example I gave isn't even announced for Switch, but since you did there is no mandate that ALL third party games that release on Xbox/PS must also release on Switch with feature parity. A lot of big games skip Switch completely and those that do often release much later and are heavily different experiences from the Xbox/PS version. Just look at Hogwarts Legacy as a prime example.
The ONLY platform where there are two different specs to develop for with a mandate that both versions must have feature parity is on Xbox. But sure, blame the developers if it makes you feel better. Now THAT'S a strange take.

@Sol4ris If your comment was aimed at me then you've got it completely wrong. I'm not coming from any sort of fanboy angle here, I'm coming from a perspective of someone that is frustrated with developers constantly being attacked and called lazy whenever one of them suggests that developing for the Series S gives them difficulty. A problem that has been forced upon them through no fault of their own. People are so quick to come out and attack developers when they say something they don't want to hear but as soon as there is an article saying there is job losses at a studio then those same people are coming out commenting on support. Man gamers can be so hypocritical at times.

@BBB Larians original statement on the matter confirmed that they were working on an Xbox version but had hit a problem with the Series S and if they could solve that problem then it would release. There is no guarantee in that statement that it would ever actually release. In fact they go as far as to say that they do not want to announce anything until they are confident that it will be able to release. Just because you had no doubt in your mind that it would release that does not mean it would release either.

@Moby The GOTY reference was just highlighting the fact that BG3 is an exceptional circumstance and MS won't be so willing to bend their rules for less high profile titles.

@Moby Except they don't have to design for X and S, they can skip Xbox altogether if it becomes too much of a problem. Just look at the very high profile Baldur's Gate 3 example. The only reason an Xbox version is coming is because Microsoft allowed them to drop a feature on the S. They might not be willing to do it for other games that aren't serious GOTY contenders.

@Jaxx420 Completely agree with what you're saying, although GTA V was taking a 360/PS3 game and scaling it up to Xbox one/PS4 and then Series S|X/PS5. Scaling a current gen game down to 360/PS3 would be a far bigger challenge.

@TakeItEasy It was the top 150 games for engagement in October that Alan Wake 2 wasn't in, not sales. A month which it was out for precisely four days of. Also to note it wasn't in the top 150 games on PlayStation for the same metric too though so I guess they will need to skip that too then.

@BacklogBrad Don't you think the publicly blaming the hardware and causing a headache for Xbox could have been what led to MS easing up on the parity clause in the first place? There's no faster way to get a company to backtrack on a policy like a bit of good old public outrage. Besides, they had to say something as people were getting suspicious that something was going on because it had been announced for PS but not for Xbox.
I find their honesty about the situation quite refreshing and I don't think it was their intention to throw the Series S under the bus.
Plus you think they shouldn't have publicly blamed the Series S and they seem to be the only ones that have had a problem with it. If they didn't say anything then you wouldn't have known that they had a problem with it, how do you then know that there aren't other developers that have had problems but just haven't announced it publicly. You've got to ask yourself why did split screen on Halo Infinite never happen? Why does Forza Motorsport not have split screen? Purely speculation but there does seem to be a common theme developing.

That does look really cool. Looks nice and easy to use too.

@OldGamer999 Completely agree. Recent estimates put game pass subscribers at around 30 million. There are around 58 million Xbox One sales, and Series S|X sales are estimated at around the 21 million mark. Granted many of the Series S|X sales will be people upgrading from Xbox One but I'd guess that a high percentage of these users will be game pass subscribers, which would not suggest that there are many subscribers on PC at all.
In addition to this Phil Spencer also stated during the ABK saga that only a small percentage of game pass subscribers have even tried cloud gaming. Also that they only see cloud gaming as an accessory to gaming and not that they expect people to use it as their primary means of gaming.
All this leads to console still being their most significant market by far.

@iplaygamesnstuff It's nothing to do with being the grown up it the room, it's more the fact that they are the only ones that have put themselves in the position where they can, or possibly even need, yo say that. Microsoft have acquired some of the most popular games around with large communities into the millions on other platforms, such as Minecraft on Switch and CoD, ESO and Minecraft on PlayStation and he needs to reassure those communities. With the exception of Bungie with Destiny, who operate virtually independently of Sony to a degree that they don't even really feel like part of the PS community, neither Sony or Nintendo are really in that position. Were Nintendo to suddenly take ownership of Fortnite and Sony to buy EA they would then be able to say something similar.

@ZYDIO Hold on, did you just say that Sony and Nintendo are both incapable of coming up with anything new when Microsoft have literally just spent around $100 billion buying up a load of popular IPs across Bethesda and ABK rather than come up with anything new and creative of their own with such an obscene amount of money?

@Romans12 I believe in this case a lot of the hate is more down to it clearly being DLC that has been repackaged as a bare bones full price release. Nothing to do with MS on this occasion.

@ZuneTattooGuy People talk about this like it reduces it drastically, it doesn't. I have Black Ops Cold War installed, no warzone or anything else, just Cold War. I've already deleted the campaign as I finished that years ago and it's still sitting at 200gb. I can uninstall the multiplayer, which will reduce it by 56gb. The zombies, which will reduce it by a further 16gb plus a further 7gb for dead ops. And the hi-res pack is 17gb. All that doesn't even come to 100gb so there's an additional 100gb of space being taken up by...nothing it would appear.

@Sifi Not everyone does see the same bugs, no. It happens with most major releases, some people seem to have no end of bugs and crashes and others get through the game with very little issues. I'm not disputing anyone else's experience and I can only go by my own person experience and after 11 hours of play I haven't had a single crash or encounters any of the bugs listed in that thread so far.

@TheSimulator From what others on here have previously said the terms of the deal with Ubisoft for the ABK streaming rights forbids MS from acquiring Ubisoft for the duration of the deal.

@Kaloudz To be fair to Phil he has been fairly consistent in saying that he wanted there to be parity for Call of Duty across all platforms right the way through the whole saga so it looks like he is going to honour that. It may even be something that is stated in all those agreements they signed.

@BrilliantBill A lot of the time these comments are being made in response to questions they have been asked about a specific subject. He was asked his opinion on the series S and he just gave an honest response.
His answer is interesting as it deals with the common response about the comparison with scaling for PC and how it isn't as easy in this case.

@BeerIsAwesome If permanent double credits as part of a premium pack isn't pay to win I don't know what is.

@Sifi That's the thing though, as Phil Spencer himself said, MS would need to massively outbid Sony for exclusivity to cover the losses for potential sales on a platform with a much higher install base. To the point where it would possibly end up costing them more than they would get back in return.

@JayJ I see you're no familiar with sarcasm lol. In all seriousness though I don't think I've ever seen a game being marked down by a professional reviewer simply because it has microtransactions. I also fail to see why adding new content on a regular basis completely for free is such a bad thing, surely that is something that we should be praising.