Just One Game Is Confirmed For Xbox Game Pass In December 2023 So Far

I can't complain about this. This year has been a homerun for Gamepass.

Gamepass been good this year my only moan is the quality of the new first party titles could really have been a bit better and should have stole the show this year and put the Xbox brand on top with some momentum.
Hoping in 2024 they achieve this.

Game Pass currently has 11 Games nominated for Awards at this years GotY Awards like Starfield, Sea of Stars, Forza Motorsport, Party Animals, Hi-Fi Rush, Lies of P, Cocoon, Dead Space etc - let alone all the 'other' games you can play for much less cost than buying a game like Starfield or Forza individually.

As far as 'day 1' releases go, its also very dependent on what is releasing and December is not exactly full of 'big' releases. Avatar is probably the biggest but very unlikely to be on Game Pass day/date when its on Ubisoft+ and don't want to hurt sales revenue too much. Therefore I wouldn't expect a 'big' day 1 AAA release in GP this month but maybe an 'older' AAA release may come instead.

I don't think the 'Quality' has been that bad either - apart from Redfall of course. But Starfield was perhaps better than 'expected' although I think some had very unrealistic expectations just because of MS ownership. Its still a very 'typical' Bethesda game with all the things 'typical' of a Bethesda game in aesthetics, game structure etc. It, like Fallout 4 or 76 before, weren't exactly cutting edge graphically - yet somehow they expected MS to come in and transform Bethesda into something they have never been - at least it wasn't as 'bad' to play as their previous releases on Console - something MS certainly 'helped'.

I expected Starfield to be Fallout in Space and it basically is - albeit with much more granular detail, better combat and much 'better performance/fewer bugs' than you'd have expected from a Bethesda game under Zenimax. Forza is Forza and racing games haven't really changed in decades - its more 'refinement' than evolving. I also don't think it helped with 'numerous' games still absent despite being announced years ago - Hellblade, Indiana, Contraband, Fable, Perfect Dark etc that makes it feel 'more' disappointing when you get games that don't appeal as much or were clearly developed with last gen in mind on aging game engines as others are now releasing games on newer engines that make those games look more dated...

@BAMozzy
You are spot on there about the next line of games needing to be on modern engines, it’s 2024 next year I haven’t really felt the power of my series x yet, actually a bit, but that’s been third party games.

A bit happy with what’s there now. Hopefully less games added will also mean less subtracted.

There will be more than one game but I don't expect anything decent this month its been a great few months to be honest. no excuses why they can't add some Activision gmaes though

I have plenty to play, but I do like to see the hoard grow larger each month

@OldGamer999 considering they have to develop for series s as well ,apart from a resolution boost for series x you won't see any difference, if this stays the same towards the end of this generation, and first party devs want to use the extra horsepower of the ps5 and series x to implement new gameplay ideas ,how on earth is the series x gonna compete if its being held back by the series s.

@OldGamer999 I don't think any of us have yet - at least not in what you'd probably consider as a game with mass appeal - because I do think that Flight Sim too should be considered as a truly 'next-gen' game.

I can understand perhaps why some games are still not here - Hellblade 2, State of Decay 3, Gears 6 for example as these are expected to release on UE5 and UE5 wasn't actually 'production' ready until April 2022, and was in 'early access' from May 2021 - and certain aspects weren't working on release - like Nanite for Vegetation for example.

Whilst they could have created stuff in UE4 in preparation, there are certain things they may have had to wait or try to find a work-around, a plug-in or some other way to get what they want in UE5 and being 'new' too, maybe taking longer as they 'learn' the new engine/tools.

I don't think I've seen a game yet that is really using the CPU to its fullest. This gen has multi-threaded CPU cores for example but games are still built for single thread CPU's and not that well optimised so 1 or 2 cores get bottlenecked whilst the rest are underutilised, not really working efficiently. I don't think any game is using Mesh Shaders either .

With games taking 5yrs+ to make - not like the 360 gen when sequels to games would take a few years, its not surprising that they haven't really built and released games for this gen. Games releasing were likely started during the last gen, on engines they had back then, even using their 'previous' games as the template to build on - maybe with some 'next' gen feature bolted on (RT reflections for example) but still have the old methods as back-up/lower tier settings - Highest quality adds RT to Screen Space, same with Shadows too so they are running 'several' methods simultaneously because of extra resources available and so they can 'scale' games down to much lower spec hardware. Even Hogwarts has been scaled down for Switch now.

So why we are all still really looking forward to these truly next gen games to come, we are still getting 'legacy' releases that were clearly built for Last gen Hardware initially, even if they decided at some point not to port to last gen hardware. Gotham Knights for example. Then you see some wonderful looking graphics of games to come and get Starfield that 'looks' last gen with 360 gen NPC interactions and the engine is clearly showing its age. That doesn't help but in reality, its probably a 'better' game than Zenimax would release - we all know Redfall was a Zenimax demand of Arkane, not what Arkane wanted (or were set-up) to make but MS take the hit on that.

I wouldn’t be surprised if there were a few bigger games waiting to get some Black Friday sales before being announced for Game Pass.

wasn't Fable supposed to come out this year?

I wish i can have time to even play last year games!!! Om still half thro persona 5 royal (i finished original) and im playing fe fates special edition (finished brithlight), i just finished high on life and now laying Dlc also im halfway thro far cry 5...BUT I CANT CATCH UP!!! I wish we had 36h a day, i have to work and study also im married and i m playing games and going to GYM .....surely im not taking it EASY

Nothing this week and slow december , but maybe they Will announce some surprise release at the game awards. But anyway my backlog is full.

@Mephisto2869
I have always said poor in house xbox developers have to deal with series s and x, PC and cloud stuff.
When an in-house Sony or Nintendo studio make a game for one console PS5 and Switch and can maximise their focus and resources and time on just one console.

And I believe that is one of reasons they get what I call mastery of that single console and better quality in all systems of their games for the hardware. Whilst series x get average to just above average Starfield, Redfall and Forza type games that really should be series x, xbox exclusive showcase games at the top tier level.
Jack of all trades but master of none for the series x.

A few Activision games should be dropped onto gamepass I'm sure there's a few good to go for gamepass by now

Maybe they leaving it to surprise us with silksong for Xmas 🤣😭

i don't think game pass is gonna work out/make it tbh. but im hopeful xbox survives as a console.(hardware)

There’s going to be more added. It couldn’t have a month with just one game.

Probably a good shadow drop to GPU during Game Awards.

@GrumpyDev so 25 days of CoD games then? 🤣

@BAMozzy Alan Wake 2 uses Mesh Shaders - and it's amazing (best looking forest areas I have ever seen in a game)!

As far as multi-threading: the best example I have seen is Cyberpunk 2077.

Apparently, the beta patch of Starfield on Steam has improved CPU threading significantly (to the point that a CPU close to Series X|S spec is able to achieve 60fps). Hopefully that translates to console as well - even if it only irons out some framerate hiccups.

But I do agree that developers need to work on scaling out better - especially since clock speeds per core have remained relatively static over the years.

@OldGamer999 You're completely right.

We know the parity clause and how that effected 3rd party developers. And we k ow that even before the Baldur's Gate 3 exception for a key feature, that there are even more strict rules that first parties have to adhere to. Since you know, they don't have a choice on if they release or not.

I don't expect us to see any truly "next gen" looking games on Xbox simply because of the S holding things back. We've already seen the downgrades games like Forza underwent between pre release gameplay at conferences and final release.

Even as is, you see things like Spider Man 2, an open world game, looking amazing compared to anything Xbox has at the moment. At times it like you're watching a live action movie.

As yous said though, the best examples on Xbox are third party which is wild when you think about it. First parties are typically the ones that are putting out shining examples. For example, no third party had released something better looking than Breath of the Wild, let alone Tears of the Kingdom, on Switch.

I'm still waiting for both my day 1 Series Xs, about $1400 worth of consoles, to feel like they were a worthwhile investment.

@CHAOSbutler117 They’ll shadow drop Baulders gate 3 mid month. Mark my words.

@InterceptorAlpha I have news for you, Open world Xbox Series X Flight Simulator looks far better than Spiderman 2 and has lastability, unlike Spiderman 2 which lasts a week tops despite being the only Sony first party game for the whole year.

Did you account for the PS4 holding back the PS5 as well?

.

@Sifi I have about 1200 hours in flight sim with a full HOTAS and seat set up. Almost enough hours for a commercial flight license if I were flying real planes instead of playing a video game.

If you doing any lower attitude flights, even in areas that have had region updates, the graphics fall apart quickly. What's even more jarring is having the high resolution instrumentation and flight surfaces juxtaposed to buildings looking like they're suitable for Cities Skylines 2. All while running at an unsteady 30fps on Series X. Meanwhile Spider Man 2 is able to do stable 60fps with ray tracing enabled.

PS4 hasn't been holding back PS5 at all. Sony doesn't have any arbitrary rules for games to support the same things on PS4 as PS5. Nor do they even require PS5 releases to be on PS4.

Spider Man 2, for example, is PS5 exclusive.

I am very much looking forward to Steamworld Build! Love that franchise!

@Sifi Actually I'd go one further and say the last of us 2, a Ps4 game that came out 3 ½ years ago probably still has better graphics than any 1st party Xbox exclusive.

I think they'll just do the normal November 28th announcement for December Game Pass games and that's it outside of maybe BG3 given announcement of announcement of Xbox version at the Game Awards has already been made.

With all signs pointing towards GTA6 being at the Game Awards which would steal the spotlight, it feels more likely that the platform holders will save reveals that may have normally fitted in the Game Awards for their own events instead.

@GamingFan4Lyf Whether those games are fully using the Hardware feature set or even just a part of them, I was primarily talking about first party, the expectations etc - especially when 'others' are using more modern engines and/or more of the hardware feature set.

When MS took over Zenimax, they suddenly expected Starfield to use all the features of DX12 and series hardware promised at launch of the Hardware, they expected at least 'Death Stranding/Last of Us 2/RDR2' type characters and 'realism' of the environments etc - not the 'typical' Bethesda look, style and feel of a game - something they have been doing for decades.

Then Starfield releases and its not a '9+', its not a graphical showcase for the hardware, its not really evolved much from Fallout 3. Fallout 4 added colour and base building, Starfield added more 'maps' and ship building - but the 'core' of these is the 'engine' and the template they consistently use for basically everything. Talking to NPC's is as 'lifeless' and static as it was in Morrowind - albeit with more pixels and detail these days.

Anyway, the point I was trying to make is that much of what MS has released haven't been the 'Graphical' showcase to compete with Spider-Man or R&C and most have been Legacy builds that were 'expected' to launch on Last gen too (and we know how weak the XB1S is comparatively) and not built purely for Series Hardware to utilise the CPU, Velocity Engine and all the other Hardware features they built in.

Expectation changed with Starfield because they stopped being owned by Zenimax and are now owned by MS so they 'expected' MS to suddenly change Bethesda so that their games now are Graphical Showcases for the Hardware, that sell gamers on the 'power of Xbox' etc and then disappointed that its a 'typical' Bethesda game that looks 'dated' and doesn't exactly 'feel' like a modern game.

@BBB would you not prefer to wait till next year for the physical...it has stickers 😁

Game pass has been great all year.
However, having slim pickings over the holiday month doesn't strike me as being very clever, its this month when people decide which eco system they will buy into for Xmas, and people seldom look beyond what's right in front of them. I don't think their release schedule helps their sales, which is a shame.

I've let my own GP ultimate lapse, partially as I have so many games to play on the other systems, and partly because of my stance on the mangers at ABK, who are now all Xbox. They are making it easy for me to not regret that.... I doubt I'll last a month without resubbing though, qualms at the staff or not

@DonaldMcRonald It would be well received they had nothing else,

@BAMozzy Completely agree with everything you said about Starfield. In fact, the second it was announced it was just another iteration of the same engine Bethesda has been using, I kind of feared it would have been the same thing with a shinier coat of paint.

I think Starfield was more of a result of the game being in development for so long and completely revamping everything probably would have doubled its development time.

Hellblade II, at the moment, is looking to be Microsoft's technical showcase. If Fable achieves the same graphical fidelity as the trailer we saw, that, too will be something to behold.

I just wish we didn't have to wait so long for the Series X|S to shine. I do the Series consoles have a "PS3" moment when everything comes together later in the life cycle.

@themightyant I don't think Microsoft can really go back on PC requirement, though. I do think Microsoft should make some bold moves and start requiring that PC-equivalent hardware to Series S be the base specs for all games going forward (including requiring SSDs).

I can play Starfield on my Surface Book 2 - it has an 8th Gen i7, 16 GB RAM, and Nvidia 1060 6GB - albeit at 50% of 3240 x 2160 resolution and everything set to "Low" and 30fps.

Interestingly enough, I can run Control at High Graphical settings with all RT effects (at 640x400 render resolution) and get 40fps (take that RTX)! 😅

I do agree that weaker hardware challenges the developer in positive ways as it forces them to think slightly differently - focusing on smarter engineering techniques. I look at a specific example of Larian reducing VRAM usage thanks to Series S development that can be leveraged on all platforms.

Nintendo is a fantastic example of that. What those engineers can do with that dated (and mobile) hardware is nothing short of amazing. For them, newer and faster hardware will be more of a playground than a necessity.

@themightyant I'd argue that Nintendo focus much more on Game-play than state of the art cutting edge Graphical presentations. Yes games like Zelda may look great in a cartoony like way that works for them and 'ageless' quality compared to going for a more realistic look with realistic materials, lighting, textures, physics etc etc.

A lot of games these days feel more like Style over Substance - that they have to LOOK great to attract gamers in, but the stories, the game-play etc is rather 'generic' - built on the 'template' of that studio's previous game with more work put into the Graphical presentation and evolving that than the game-play.

Go back and play some of the games we got back in the 360/PS3 generation and a lot still hold up today - albeit not graphically. But Dead Space, Mass Effect, GTA5, BioShock etc still hold up today in terms of Game-play/Story.

It seems that as long as you have Great visuals, the rest doesn't matter so much. Switch proves that game 'visuals' aren't as important as Game-play - especially if it allows gamers to play 'where' and 'when' they want. Who would buy Doom, the Witcher 3 or even Hogwarts when the game is 'significantly' better on a Series X for example? But they sell on Switch to make it 'worthwhile' for Publishers to consider porting too, consider scaling the game down to that hardware level.

It's not about making games that ONLY the Elite Gamers with enough disposable income to buy 'Premium' Hardware and/or pay 'Premium' prices for games just because they are 'new', but making games that more people can enjoy - even if its not the 'best' way to enjoy, they can still play the game, experience the stories etc. Cloud might not be the 'best' way to play games, but it maybe the ONLY way some people can play...

@themightyant
Exactly what I have always said, to many devices for an Xbox developer to deal with, whatever the other devices are.

You must remember the xbox360 days when the PR guys used to come saying the reason games are so good on xbox360 is because of the console design and that Xbox developers only make games for xbox360.

That’s was good old days when they gave Nintendo and Sony some great competition.

@themightyant I hate Bethesda's engine. I wish that the amount of interactivity in Starfield actually had a point. Like, sure, it's nice you can stuff an entire cockpit with potatoes, but what gameplay point does that serve other than to test engine limits?

NPCs also feel needlessly more bloated than they need to be. From my understanding, the crowds of people have their own complex logic running which is why cities are the biggest hit to performance. If the vast majority of them don't actually have any gameplay purpose other than to serve as window dressing, do they really need to be more than a simple crowd system with basic logic?

Sure, all the complex systems give the game a certain level of realism, but if those complex systems aren't being used for actual gameplay purposes, then it's just simply bloat for the sake of bloat - and doesn't leave room for more actual gameplay.

It also doesn't make room for more refinement in the things that do matter (e.g. more complex character animations, elimination or reducing loading screens, more robust enemy AI, etc.) because resources are being drained for stuff that doesn't (persisting the location of all dynamic objects in the game, giving all crowd NPCs "lives", etc.).

I look to Cyberpunk 2077 as the example. CDPR was able to make the world feel lived in without draining resources for the sake of "realism".

@OldGamer999 The difference between the 360 days and today is that MS were running Xbox as a separate 'side project' - not really integrated into the 'full' Microsoft ecosystem. MS had a LOT of PC customers who weren't being catered for at all. That all changed during the XB1 era when MS was deciding whether to pull out of the gaming industry or merge Xbox into Microsoft and cater to a 'much larger' demographic of gamers.

That really started when MS also started to release their Games to PC day/date - I think Forza 7 was the 'first' game but every game since has released simultaneously on PC too.

By not focussing purely on Consoles and a much 'larger' demographic, incorporating 'Xbox' into Microsoft and Windows, even Cloud streaming to reach more Gamers on whatever 'hardware' they have, They can reach 'more' gamers than ever. Yes the 'Console' isn't necessary - its optional.

The OG Xbox was meant to bridge the gap between 'traditional' consoles and PC's to bring PC games (like Morrowind, Halo etc) to more people, to get more PC games into gamers hands, to bring their DirectX to more gamers.

At one point, MS wanted MS Office in every household, now with Xbox as part of Windows and their Cloud streaming option, they have found a way to get Xbox into the hands of 'Every' gamer as every gamer will likely have some hardware they could play on, inc a cheap and Premium Console option if they 'prefer' that tier of gaming.

They don't 'need' to make Handhelds to compete with Steam Deck or a higher spec, much higher price Console to 'compete' with PC's because their games are already on Handhelds and higher end PC's - all part of the XBOX Ecosystem.

People don't 'need' to buy an Xbox or miss out on ANY first Party game. Wherever you 'want' or 'can' play Starfield, there is an option. Obviously not on Playstation/Switch, but on EVERY other gaming devices that billions play on, you can play. Those who may only play via cloud on their Mobile/tablet are as important to MS as you who play on Series S/X or those that choose to play on PC - you are still part of the Xbox ecosystem

@BAMozzy
I totally get what you are saying and agree get Xbox onto all those devices.
But do not ever forget or neglect console sales.
Especially across Europe and the UK it’s different to the USA and Xbox used to understand that and approach the market differently.

Whatever Xbox are doing they are not being meet with great success, especially for the brand Xbox and momentum. We could debate that’s because of the games, which is where the other two seem to excel in games and especially brand recognition and merchandise in shops etc.

Let’s remember there might be billions of devices out there but series consoles have slightly more Gamepass subs than all those billions of other devices put together.
Console sales are also down 11% on Xbox one at the same time frame.

So billions of devices but less GP than series consoles.
Series console sales less than Xbox one by 11%
They need to do something.
Maybe the recent price reduction of the consoles today series x £360 they may have woken them up to what I always say.
Every console sold that is not a series x or s, and another sold for the competition takes that sale away from the Xbox eco system and maybe a game pass sale and draws momentum to competition.

@themightyant I'm a programmer too, so I get it. I tried my hand at game development (just as a hobby, not in a company) and I hated it.

Sometimes, you just have to "start over" and use the lessons learned to create a stronger foundation.

For game engines, I think starting with something that is properly multi-threaded (where it actually scales workload as more cores are present) is the absolute minimum. Ditching HDD reliance all together is the next minimum.

There are older CPUs out there that suddenly get a new lease on life when a game engine isn't so single-threaded.

CPUs have been so underutilized in gaming over the years, it's sad. Commercially viable multi-core processors have been around for almost 20 years now and, to this day, they aren't utilized like they should be in gaming.

The Starfield beta patch actually improved things significantly for a Series X|S equivalent CPU just by improving CPU efficiency - despite the fact Bethesda claimed that the engine in Starfield was "high multi-threaded" thanks to AMD's partnership (news flash, it wasn't). I'll be interested to see how my Surface Book 2 handles the patch when it goes live across the board.

Definitely time for Bethesda to take a step back and consider creating its own engine from scratch.

In fact, I'd love for a few studios within Microsoft to come together and create like a "Microsoft engine" that can be used over varying game studios. Something that makes full use of DX12/Xbox consoles. An engine that can have the insane performance of id Tech, handle massive worlds, if need be, and ditches rasterized lighting/shadows all together (even if that means having a less accurate software-based solution as a fallback to hardware-based). I want Microsoft to take a very bold leap rather than continuing doing more of the same. Microsoft certainly has the engineering resources to do it across all its studios.

If Microsoft can make advancements in Quantum Computing, it sure as heck can create a game engine that can show the world what DX12 can really do when properly utilized.

@OldGamer999 The purpose of a Console is to get people in to your ecosystem. Sony and Nintendo only have their Consoles as an access point and Sony only sell games on PC once they are sure that game isn't selling consoles to extract more Sales revenue from it. MS don't need to copy Sony in that regard because 'PC' is part of the MS ecosystem anyway so sell them the games on the same day/date.

Console sales are irrelevant. Even if Sony sells more Consoles, doesn't mean they have 'more' gamers in their 'ecosystem' or that Xbox is floundering way behind, because they have many others in their ecosystem who 'choose' to play on other devices and/or access games via sub services instead. XB1S/X gamers for example don't have to upgrade at all to a Series S/X and can play Starfield, Forza, Flight Sim etc - all part of the Xbox Community even if they 'choose' to remain on Last gen hardware. Those who choose to play on PC too, even if its not as well specced as a Series X, may not choose to buy a Console because ALL the games are playable on their PC and still part of the Xbox ecosystem.

That's why cross-buy, cross-progression etc works between Xbox and Windows 'PC' because its all part of the 'Xbox' family, the Xbox ecosystem. That's why I can buy or play Starfield on PC/Xbox locally with my progression carrying across, why I don't 'need' to buy it again (if bought Digitally) because its part of the same ecosystem. If you want to play Spider-Man/GoW etc on PC because its a separate ecosystem.

If Sony sell 100m PS5's, that's 100m in their ecosystem. If MS sell 50m consoles, they could have a much larger Ecosystem than Sony, a much bigger market to sell their games to and much higher numbers of players spending time in their games etc.

Yes, Xbox Consoles may not be 'as' popular as Playstation, but 'Xbox' can reach far more gamers with their Reach, their 'ecosystem'. The Console 'isn't' as important when its NOT the entire Ecosystem, its just one of the MANY options to get players into your Ecosystem. Its not just the rich or dedicated hardcore gamers that can play Starfield, just the ones willing to pay $500 for Hardware and $70 for the game, but anyone with as little as $10 and a device capable of streaming it can play, bringing them into the ecosystem, those with PC's and last gen Consoles are part of the 'next-gen' Xbox ecosystem too and all that 'extra' revenue from 'outside' the Console hardware is benefitting those on Console too.

MS would NEVER have bought Bethesda or ABK if they kept the Console as a Separate entity - the fact that Xbox merged into MS is why MS started buying Studio's and growing Xbox to compete. They'd never recuperate those costs if they had to rely on 'just' their Console ecosystem to buy games/Sub services etc...

The fact that its NOW not about Console sales and now more about getting people into the MS ecosystem (Xbox Consoles, PC and Cloud specifically), that has enabled MS to grow to 'target' gamers from casual mobile only gamers all the way up to the most hardcore dedicated gamer on the best Gaming PC's you can own...

@BAMozzy
Let’s sit back enjoy and see what happens
But consoles and console sales count more than you believe.
What you have said totally matters and so does the wider eco system definitely.

Let see how successful Xbox are and if increased console sales occur that will have a massive part of it.
I think we agree on most things, but you miss my point series console sales around 24 million has more GP subscriptions than all those billions of other devices you keep mentioning.

That tells me that the heart of Xbox is in the console world more so than those billions of other devices that have less GP subscriptions.

That is a massive attachment ratio in dramatic favour of the series consoles for GP subscriptions.

@OldGamer999 Its a bit saying Ford really need to do more to make their Ford GT more popular because Ferrari sell more cars than Ford sells that one specific model - forgetting that Ford has many other models and ways to be a Ford owner/driver.

Back in the 360 days, the PC was a very separate platform and MS were neglecting their Windows based customers on that hardware and only catering to their Windows based Console customers. Now they cater to ALL their Windows based customers as well as have options for Android/iOS platforms - streaming on Xbox servers so technically 'playing' on an Xbox even though they didn't buy it...

@themightyant

While that would be a nice thought, we already know for a fact the S is holding back X due to the parity clause. It would also be safe to say that for third party devs, the parity clause is lax compared to what first parties have to contend with to encourage third parties to develop for the X instead of driving them away.

That say, the CPUs aren't quite the same. The Series S is around 5.3% slower.

Another big kicker is how much worse the RAM is. The S has 37.5% less RAM.

Both consoles have high speed and low speed RAM. The S has 40% less high speed RAM and 75% less low speed RAM.

Of that, the S's high speed RAM is 60% slower than the X whole the low speed is 84% slower.

Without fast enough RAM the CPU essentially has to sit there while the RAM catches up. Without an adequate amount, the CPU has to, again, sit there and wait while the RAM swaps files out.

All of this adds up to neutering the performance of the CPU much further than just the clock speeds of it does.

And finally, with the 67% slower GPU, that means things that the CPU could normally off load on extra GPU power can no longer be done.

@InterceptorAlpha
The series s and PC and cloud game development takes more resources and costs more money.

If Xbox developers could focus on just the series x they could probably produce those generation defining games like they used to.
The Xbox developers are stretched too far and have too much to deal with compared with PS5 and Switch only focused game development.
It’s pure fact and common sense and some on here just are not listening.

Xbox is Jack of all trades now and master of none and we will probably never see an Xbox level of game at TOTK of GOWR unless they have thousands of developers and a serious amount of time all developing one game.

@BAMozzy
Well there is not much Xbox playing going on, on other devices at the minute, so it’s not going their way and Game Pass subscribers.
More Gamepass subscribers on the 24 million series consoles sold.

@OldGamer999 Attachment rates on Console should be higher for Game Pass - purely because these devices are bought purely for gaming - PC's and 'Mobile' tech is often bought for multiple tasks.

If Xbox sells 20m Series X consoles but 50% also buy GP, that's 10m Subs and quite a high attachment compared to the Billions of PC/Mobiles out there. 500m PC's on the market and just 2% buy Game Pass - that's as many subs as Xbox brings in but a MUCH lower attachment rate - which has more scope for growth? Streaming is still very much in its infancy and certainly not the 'best' option, so attachment rates for GP to 'cloud' only is going to be very LOW considering the amount of people with Smart Phones or some other way to stream games to play.

Also not all those Game Pass customers on 'Xbox' Consoles are buying or own a Series Xbox either. They don't have to buy a Series S to play Starfield, Forza etc and can play games better than their XB1S hardware would allow them to play.

XB1S owners may prefer to buy a PS5 to play games they 'can't' play on XB1S via Game Pass Cloud for example or maybe choose to upgrade to a PC at some point because all the games are on PC and a whole lot more too, can do more on a PC etc - but they are still Xbox customers as Xbox is not just the Console anymore.

Whilst Consoles remain a 'popular' option or 'some' gamers who prefer the 'Console' for ease of use, for that living room experience, the Xbox Console is still a viable option, but if you spend more time gaming on the go, a steam deck or RoG Ally for example makes more sense to buy than a Series S/X. Point is, you NEVER need an Xbox again - its your 'choice' because it suits the way you 'prefer' to access games. You could play Stafield on your Mobile, on last gen hardware etc - but you prefer to play on a Series console. Others may prefer to play on their PC rather than spend money on a Console to play games they'd 'prefer' to play on PC anyway.

Sell 100m PS5's and only 100m can play Spider-Man 2, sell 50m Series Consoles, but more than 100m can play Starfield if they wanted...

TenCent are the biggest gaming Company in the world based on Revenue despite not being one of the '3' Console Platform holders. MS could/should overtake Sony with ABK now part of MS and be above both Sony and Nintendo - despite having the 'lowest' Console sales of the 3.

At what point will some be 'happy'? When MS sells more Consoles than Sony or Nintendo despite the fact their 'ecosystem' reaches far beyond the Console Hardware (unlike Sony/Nintendo Hardware) or when they overtake Sony in terms of users/revenue that they can 'reinvest' into making more games that 'more' people will enjoy on whatever Platform they choose to play on - have MANY more players in their ecosystem and reaching far more gamers than they could had they stuck to just consoles?

@themightyant Definitely, tough choices. All I really want is for Microsoft studios to make full use of the technology it designed the same way Sony and Nintendo do.

Microsoft studios shouldn't be "outdone" by other studios when it comes to DX12/Xbox optimization. Microsoft studios should be at the forefront.

We've gone so far off topic on this thread, so that's that last thing I will say. LOL!

Sorry PX!

Hopefully Game Pass will have some surprises for Dec 2023 so that those who get Xbox for whatever gift-giving holiday they celebrate will have even more to enjoy when they get their systems hooked up!

@themightyant I do hope Hellblade II hits the mark and makes an excellent addition to Game Pass in 2024 (trying to stay near topic a little here- lol).

I have been watching the Dev Diary stuff and it looks like they have put a ton of effort into making whatever vision they have for the game come to life - I would hate to see all that dedication go down the toilet due to poor execution.

@themightyant I regret not initially playing with headphones. I have a pretty nice sound setup and I thought that it would have been superior to headphones.

Not the case at all.

But I have learned a lot about binaural audio and virtual 3D audio since then.

The second time around didn’t have the same impact even though I played it the “proper” way.

@themightyant I pretty much only play with headphones these days. Any game time I do get if after my daughter is in bed.

Not so bad, though. Dolby Atmos for Headphones works extremely well so I don't feel like I am missing anything.