Xbox One - General Discussion Thread

[quote name="Richard Kain" post="11464855" timestamp="1390418153"]That's the consequence of having a system that was originally designed with digital-only in mind. The original assumption for the XBox One was that all games would be digital, period. They can probably change things up for future games so that all DLC won't be automatically downloaded for every game. But this close to launch its understandable that some of the first games would not be designed with that sort of thing in mind.[/quote]
No, that's the consequence of releasing a multiplayer/co-op game and keeping everything compatible. It isn't new. Battlefield 3 did it and Borderlands did it. The difference was there was a limit to the file size for patches so they had to hide it as free dlc. Either way you still needed it to play online. Same thing here. You don't want it? Don't download it.
 
Renegade Moose said:
No, that's the consequence of releasing a multiplayer/co-op game and keeping everything compatible.
Click to expand...
The reason why so many games on the XBox One include co-op/multiplayer on-line hooks is because the developers were initially promised a digital-only, constant-online environment. Part of the push for digital-only games was the thought that they could insure constant connection to online services. It's also why all XBox One games get installed to the hard drive, and never run solely off of the disc. That in turn is part of what makes sizable, required DLC downloads onerous. If the DLC was the only thing being installed on the hard drive, there wouldn't be nearly as much of an issue. It's only when you're installing 30+ Gigs for EVERY game that you start running out of room.

The all digital focus of the Xbox One is what's primarily filling up the hard drives for the system. I'm not saying it was the wrong choice. But it IS why storage capacity is more of an issue on that system. (and why you will likely want to uninstall games you aren't currently playing) Microsoft's decision was forward-thinking. But it directly leads to users running out of room on a 500 Gig drive. And it makes large DLC add-ons that aren't optional more of a problem.

 
Richard Kain said:
The reason why so many games on the XBox One include co-op/multiplayer on-line hooks is because the developers were initially promised a digital-only, constant-online environment. Part of the push for digital-only games was the thought that they could insure constant connection to online services. It's also why all XBox One games get installed to the hard drive, and never run solely off of the disc. That in turn is part of what makes sizable, required DLC downloads onerous. If the DLC was the only thing being installed on the hard drive, there wouldn't be nearly as much of an issue. It's only when you're installing 30+ Gigs for EVERY game that you start running out of room.

The all digital focus of the Xbox One is what's primarily filling up the hard drives for the system. I'm not saying it was the wrong choice. But it IS why storage capacity is more of an issue on that system. (and why you will likely want to uninstall games you aren't currently playing) Microsoft's decision was forward-thinking. But it directly leads to users running out of room on a 500 Gig drive. And it makes large DLC add-ons that aren't optional more of a problem.
Click to expand...
That doesn't make sense though, the PS4 also requires you to download game data before you can play in fact I think Killzone Shadowfall is like 40+ GB Required.

So making it sound like this is only an Xbox One requirement isn't fair to the system.

 
Rip44 said:
Don't forget Destiny's beta is around the corner after Titanfall. That'll be another next gen must have.
Click to expand...
Destiny looks pretty sweety, though I'm not sure I'll be done with Titanfall at that point.. I'm selling off most of my 360 and PS3 backlog now and am going to resist making a new one!

I'll probably have more difficulty resisting the Elder Scrolls Online, though.

 
Renegade Moose said:
No, that's the consequence of releasing a multiplayer/co-op game and keeping everything compatible. It isn't new. Battlefield 3 did it and Borderlands did it. The difference was there was a limit to the file size for patches so they had to hide it as free dlc. Either way you still needed it to play online. Same thing here. You don't want it? Don't download it.
Click to expand...
That's not true at all. I know when I went to play BF Bad Company 2 that the first time I went to go play multiplayer, I had to wait 30 minutes or so to download a huge patch, so there are big in-game updates on Xbox Live.

Putting all of that stuff in the updates is the best idea because it means that everybody has the data so there's no need for dumb compatibility packs.

TwistedShade said:
That doesn't make sense though, the PS4 also requires you to download game data before you can play in fact I think Killzone Shadowfall is like 40+ GB Required.
So making it sound like this is only an Xbox One requirement isn't fair to the system.
Click to expand...
You're not downloading anything but updates, as the install gets its data from the disc. The issue in regards to Xbox One is that their install process is so much longer than on PS4, for whatever reason it happens. I do like that I can stick discs for either system into the drive and it'll start doing that stuff automatically so I don't have to bother with it when I do go to play the game.

 
Kylearan said:
Destiny looks pretty sweety, though I'm not sure I'll be done with Titanfall at that point.. I'm selling off most of my 360 and PS3 backlog now and am going to resist making a new one!

I'll probably have more difficulty resisting the Elder Scrolls Online, though.
Click to expand...
That's easy to resist thanks to $15/month fees.

 
FriskyTanuki said:
That's not true at all. I know when I went to play BF Bad Company 2 that the first time I went to go play multiplayer, I had to wait 30 minutes or so to download a huge patch, so there are big in-game updates on Xbox Live.

Putting all of that stuff in the updates is the best idea because it means that everybody has the data so there's no need for dumb compatibility packs.

You're not downloading anything but updates, as the install gets its data from the disc. The issue in regards to Xbox One is that their install process is so much longer than on PS4, for whatever reason it happens. I do like that I can stick discs for either system into the drive and it'll start doing that stuff automatically so I don't have to bother with it when I do go to play the game.
Click to expand...
http://kotaku.com/how-mandatory-game-installations-will-work-on-ps4-1462283797

Don't think you understand what I'm talking about.

These aren't "Updates", here's a quote from that link I posted.

"Call it installation or call it caching, but the bottom line is that you will have to save large chunks of PlayStation 4 games to the system's hard drive. It's not an option. It'smandatory "

 

Richard Kain said:
The reason why so many games on the XBox One include co-op/multiplayer on-line hooks is because the developers were initially promised a digital-only, constant-online environment. Part of the push for digital-only games was the thought that they could insure constant connection to online services. It's also why all XBox One games get installed to the hard drive, and never run solely off of the disc. That in turn is part of what makes sizable, required DLC downloads onerous. If the DLC was the only thing being installed on the hard drive, there wouldn't be nearly as much of an issue. It's only when you're installing 30+ Gigs for EVERY game that you start running out of room.

The all digital focus of the Xbox One is what's primarily filling up the hard drives for the system. I'm not saying it was the wrong choice. But it IS why storage capacity is more of an issue on that system. (and why you will likely want to uninstall games you aren't currently playing) Microsoft's decision was forward-thinking. But it directly leads to users running out of room on a 500 Gig drive. And it makes large DLC add-ons that aren't optional more of a problem.
Click to expand...
Sorry, I misread your post. Mine was more in reference to the file size for the update than the space it takes up on the hard drive. This is actually a little misleading anyway, at least in the case or Dead Rising. The update is 13 GB, but actual additional space it takes up is more like 2-3.


FriskyTanuki said:
That's not true at all. I know when I went to play BF Bad Company 2 that the first time I went to go play multiplayer, I had to wait 30 minutes or so to download a huge patch, so there are big in-game updates on Xbox Live.

Putting all of that stuff in the updates is the best idea because it means that everybody has the data so there's no need for dumb compatibility packs.

You're not downloading anything but updates, as the install gets its data from the disc. The issue in regards to Xbox One is that their install process is so much longer than on PS4, for whatever reason it happens. I do like that I can stick discs for either system into the drive and it'll start doing that stuff automatically so I don't have to bother with it when I do go to play the game.
Click to expand...
I think you're actually agreeing with me, but I may not have worded my post very well. The title update for Xbox 360 games had a limit. I'm not sure what it is, but I think it increased over time. Then when you go online, in the case of BF Bad Company 2, you would be required to download the compatibility pack (I think dice usually just called it a patch with a number). Some games called it other things. Essentially Dead Rising 3 is doing it as part of the title update now, rather than a separate download. I personally feel this is better because then you are set to go even if you don't get the dlc because it will just update overnight.

I can't really comment on installs, since I've gone all digital so I don't really now how that is. I also don't have a PS4 to compare to either.

 
TwistedShade said:
http://kotaku.com/how-mandatory-game-installations-will-work-on-ps4-1462283797

Don't think you understand what I'm talking about.

These aren't "Updates", here's a quote from that link I posted.

"Call it installation or call it caching, but the bottom line is that you will have to save large chunks of PlayStation 4 games to the system's hard drive. It's not an option. It'smandatory "
Click to expand...
When you put a disc into a PS4, it starts installing game data from the disc and simultaneous starts downloading the latest update from PSN. The only way you'd download 40+ GB is if you bought the digital version.

Renegade Moose said:
I think you're actually agreeing with me, but I may not have worded my post very well. The title update for Xbox 360 games had a limit. I'm not sure what it is, but I think it increased over time. Then when you go online, in the case of BF Bad Company 2, you would be required to download the compatibility pack (I think dice usually just called it a patch with a number). Some games called it other things. Essentially Dead Rising 3 is doing it as part of the title update now, rather than a separate download. I personally feel this is better because then you are set to go even if you don't get the dlc because it will just update overnight.

I can't really comment on installs, since I've gone all digital so I don't really now how that is. I also don't have a PS4 to compare to either.
Click to expand...
I'd still call the Bad Company 2 thing a patch, as it's just updating the game in a means outside of the traditional way you'd usually get it on XBL.

 
Last edited by a moderator:
[quote name="FriskyTanuki" post="11465599" timestamp="1390434316"]When you put a disc into a PS4, it starts installing game data from the disc and simultaneous starts downloading the latest update from PSN. The only way you'd download 40+ GB is if you bought the digital version.

I'd still call the Bad Company 2 thing a patch, as it's just updating the game in a means outside of the traditional way you'd usually get it on XBL.[/quote]
Oh I agree. That's why I said those types of updates were a workaround for the limit of a title update.
 
I'm doing the Dead Rising 3 update now since I apparently didn't get an automatic update since the disc is required to be in the drive first? I like the way PS4 does it by just automatically grabbing updates for anything that's installed regardless of the disc being in or not. I have the automatic update option turned on for Xbox One, so it should've grabbed it if that was how it worked. The update progress bar shot up to 50% right away and has been sitting at that for a minute or two now.

Did they remove the option to eject the disc from the Menu button list or did I imagine that that was there before? I'm not sure why neither Xbox One or PS4 lets you eject the disc with voice controls with all of the options they offered at launch.

Since I hadn't used my Xbox One in a bit, there were two notifications for me that just showed the Zoo Tycoon demo and Peggle 2 with no details as to what happened? I'm guessing they got updates, but is there any concrete way to see what happened like an update log on the OS side?

 
Last edited by a moderator:
[quote name="FriskyTanuki" post="11465662" timestamp="1390435695"]I'm doing the Dead Rising 3 update now since I apparently didn't get an automatic update since the disc is required to be in the drive first? I like the way PS4 does it by just automatically grabbing updates for anything that's installed regardless of the disc being in or not. I have the automatic update option turned on for Xbox One, so it should've grabbed it if that was how it worked. The update progress bar shot up to 50% right away and has been sitting at that for a minute or two now.

Did they remove the option to eject the disc from the Menu button list or did I imagine that that was there before? I'm not sure why neither Xbox One or PS4 lets you eject the disc with voice controls with all of the options they offered at launch.

Since I hadn't used my Xbox One in a bit, there were two notifications for me that just showed the Zoo Tycoon demo and Peggle 2 with no details as to what happened? I'm guessing they got updates, but is there any concrete way to see what happened like an update log on the OS side?[/quote]
If you haven't used your Xbox in a while is it possible the system was powered down completely and that is why it didn't update? From what I've read the update should be downloaded for any installed game as long as it is in standby. I have seen a few reports online if this not working properly. Hopefully it gets fixed in the next update if that's the case.

I think I saw a notification for Battlefield when it updated overnight, but I'm not positive. If that is the case they should make it obvious that's what it is for. I guess hope for that in the update too...
 
Renegade Moose said:
If you haven't used your Xbox in a while is it possible the system was powered down completely and that is why it didn't update? From what I've read the update should be downloaded for any installed game as long as it is in standby. I have seen a few reports online if this not working properly. Hopefully it gets fixed in the next update if that's the case. I think I saw a notification for Battlefield when it updated overnight, but I'm not positive. If that is the case they should make it obvious that's what it is for. I guess hope for that in the update too...
Click to expand...
The last time I used it was maybe a few days ago and before I started the update manually, DR3 has managed to try to start up on its own with no prompt to update, so that's the impression I've gotten since Peggle 2 was probably updated recently.

 
Deader2818 said:
There is no such thing as an alpha beta.

Unless you are talking about the grocery store.
Click to expand...
so then why is the message on titan fall game says thanks for playing titan fall alpha beta see you march 11th.? i can tell you are not pc gamer alpha beta term is used alot seeing most pc games have alpha beta test.

 
Last edited by a moderator:
TimboSliceGB said:
so then why is the message on titan fall game says thanks for playing titan fall alpha beta see you march 11th.? i can tell you are not pc gamer alpha beta term is used alot seeing most pc games have alpha beta test.
Click to expand...
No, there is an Alpha, and then there is a Beta. Alpha means 1 in Greek, and Beta means 2. Hence, why phase one is called an Alpha and phase 2 is called a beta.

There is no such thing as an Alpha Beta, lol.

Ive done plenty of MMOs.

 
Last edited by a moderator:
Deader2818 said:
No, there is an Alpha, and then there is a Beta. Alpha means 1 in Greek, and Beta means 2. Hence, why phase one is called an Alpha and phase 2 is called a beta.
Click to expand...
so what you saying respawn is using bad english in their message on the game and other game companys do the same when they send alpha beta invites?

 
TimboSliceGB said:
so what you saying respawn is using bad english in their message on the game and other game companys do the same when they send alpha beta invites?
Click to expand...
I guess so because there is no such thing as an Alpha beta. There is an Alpha (Phase 1) and then a Beta (Phase 2).

I think perhaps you are just very confused.

Ive never been sent an "Alpha Beta" invite. Ive been sent Alpha (FFXI and FFXIV and FFXIV ARR) and Beta (the other ones along with Aoin, GW2, and LOTR)

 
Last edited by a moderator:
Deader2818 said:
No, there is an Alpha, and then there is a Beta. Alpha means 1 in Greek, and Beta means 2. Hence, why phase one is called an Alpha and phase 2 is called a beta.

There is no such thing as an Alpha Beta, lol.

Ive done plenty of MMOs.
Click to expand...
copy and paste right from my email i go from respawn today.

Thank you for taking part in titanfall alpha beta trial. we hope to see you at launch on march 11th 2014.

just sure why im fighting over this dumb subject with you but what ever.

 
well back to normal x1 talk. got ryse son of rome from gamefly today so far after two chapters gameplay is just avg for me. The game looks amazing and shows what is possible on x1. For me it feels like the gameplay was hurt by all the changes the gameplay got with it being kinect only then non stop button mash now just hack and slash. Game is just a tech demo for the system in my mind.

 
Tomb Raider is 50-60fps/1080p on PS4, 30-45 on XB1 (more towards the X1 area) according to a giant thread on GAF and VGChartz.

Let the blood bath begin.

 
does it really matter? it's a port of a game. just having ps4 not running at full 60 fps at 1080 p shows the devs were lazy. tomb raider was made for last gen systems so ps4 if it can run most games at full 60 fps at 1080 p it should do same for tomb raider. i played tome raider in 1080 p on pc it was nothing jaw dropping that x1/ps4 could not handle.

seems like from devs that x1 is hard like ps3 was to program for. i expect it to take some time till 3rd party devs learn to use all the resources of x1 to program games for. When that happens with the power in that system most games should be close to 60 fps at 1080p. if you build a gaming pc with all of x1 specs you can get very close to playing games at 60 fps 1080 p.

 
Last edited by a moderator:
It's not a case of being difficulty to program for.  The PS4 and X1 have nearly identical x486 architectures.  The PS4 is just a bit more powerful so you're going to get some ports that run better on PS4 than X1s if the devs aren't lazy and do the work to optimize it to take advantage of that extra power.

That's been known since way before launch with lots of articles comparing the two systems specs and saying it would mean some higher FPS and or higher resolutions on PS4 than X1.

As for whether it matters or not, that's just up to the individual and how much they care about higher FPS and resolutions.  In my view its not a huge deal, and X1 owners shouldn't skip a game just because it doesn't run quite as well as it's PS4 counterpart.  But it's probably enough to opt for the PS4 version over the X1 if you own both, unless it's something you want to play online with your buddies on Live or whatever.

 
Last edited by a moderator:
i owned both ps3/360 last gen never really got a game on either system for specs of game. 360 was always my go to system for 3rd party games and ps4 was mostly for sony 1st party titles i don't see that changing this gen either seeing xbox is really the system all my friends game on. bf4/nba /madden/ac4 all look amazing on xbox one. i have bf3 on pc at 1080 p 60 fps i really don't see diff in that and bf4 on x1.

 
Last edited by a moderator:
Wether we are talking x1/ps4 in terms of graphics they are both lower than what my PC will provide. I'm sure the ps4 could tomb raider at 60 fps but it will be at the PC version medium equivalent. I highly doubt either console will tax their hardware hard enough to successful run a game at ultra settings this early in the game.
 
Fanboygamer said:
Wether we are talking x1/ps4 in terms of graphics they are both lower than what my PC will provide. I'm sure the ps4 could tomb raider at 60 fps but it will be at the PC version medium equivalent. I highly doubt either console will tax their hardware hard enough to successful run a game at ultra settings this early in the game.
Click to expand...
Well that's a given, and why all the graphics whore stuff in console war threads gets a bit ridiculous.

If you're that obsessed with graphics, build a gaming PC as even a mid level one is going to better console graphics, while a high end one will always blow consoles away.

 
i will admit i got gaming pc last year was thinking i could not wait for amazing ultra graphics to my surprise after couple weeks it was just nothingspecial. At this point im just happy i have a gaming pc to take advantage of cheap games you get on pc allowed me to play more games then i would with just console.

 
dmaul1114 said:
Well that's a given, and why all the graphics whore stuff in console war threads gets a bit ridiculous.

If you're that obsessed with graphics, build a gaming PC as even a mid level one is going to better console graphics, while a high end one will always blow consoles away.
Click to expand...
Exactly. I built mine for about $650 with a blue ray player and I've been playing everything at ultra at 60fps or better. Luckily I snagged a badass gpu before the mining craze.
 
TimboSliceGB said:
i will admit i got gaming pc last year was thinking i could not wait for amazing ultra graphics to my surprise after couple weeks it was just nothingspecial. At this point im just happy i have a gaming pc to take advantage of cheap games you get on pc allowed me to play more games then i would with just console.
Click to expand...
I'm not a graphics whore/snob but all this talk about x1/ps4 graphics is annoying. I use my PC for mobas/indie/bf4 and I use my xbox360 for online play with family and friends. Since everyone is hardcore m$ fans I'll prolly stay inboard for the x1 pending the reviews for titanfall after launch. I've heard it was an amazing game but so is battlefield 4 and I don't want to go through that frustration again.
 
bf4 was a rushed game done in two years and dice made versions for pc/360/ps3/ps4/x1 it wouldhave been smart if dice did what respawn did split pc/x1 version with main people and have other group work on 360/ps3 edition plus game has been in dev for what close to 4 years. Not saying it's going to be bad at launch put the alpha i played seem like it worked amazing same with servers.

 
YouAreHere.jpg


Each system has a different process to program applications for, thus each side has their strengths and weaknesses, and in part each company's chosen strategies. The Xbox One's whole deal was to compliment the hardware with the cloud server infrastructure Microsoft is putting together for their Xbox gaming empire. Sony put most of their chips on the hardware and the newer RAM format with the remaining pile moved into the what is now going to be PlayStation Now. Guys, you're devolving here. Why is this still a PS4/Xbox One thread, does this thread have a moderator? *Unsubscribes yet again.

 
Spybreak8 said:
YouAreHere.jpg

Each system has a different process to program applications for, thus each side has their strengths and weaknesses, and in part each company's chosen strategies. The Xbox One's whole deal was to compliment the hardware with the cloud server infrastructure Microsoft is putting together for their Xbox gaming empire. Sony put most of their chips on the hardware and the newer RAM format with the remaining pile moved into the what is now going to be PlayStation Now. Guys, you're devolving here. Why is this still a PS4/Xbox One thread, does this thread have a moderator? *Unsubscribes yet again.
Click to expand...
Ps4 forum is worse heck you got people posting stuff from here to there. They gave lame reason for it but if someone did that from ps4 till here ps fanboys would bash us for it.
 
DestroVega said:
PS3 was more powerful than the 360 so I'm not surprised. In the end I don't think it matters.
Click to expand...
Indeed. Having more power is far different than being able to facilitate the use of that power.

More power does not make a good game. Or write a compelling story.

It MAY enable better graphics, sound, and gameplay options. But power is rarely useful unless, as in life, you know how to use it.

 
Last edited by a moderator:
Kylearan said:
Indeed. Having more power is far different than being able to facilitate the use of that power.

More power does not make a good game. Or write a compelling story.

It MAY enable better graphics, sound, and gameplay options. But power is rarely useful unless, as in life, you know how to use it.
Click to expand...
Both of these seems are pc based so there really isn't much of a learning period as the other systems before it.
 
Yeah the issue is really ports for people who really care about graphics. Story, gameplay etc is equal in a port of the same game. Thus far it's been the PS4 versions that have had higher resolutions and/or frame rates for those that care about those things. But a game like Tomb Raider will be just as much fun on X1 for everyone but the graphics whores who should just be playing the PC version anyway if they're that obsessed with graphical fidelity.

 
Last edited by a moderator:
thing is with tomb raider they said in article on ign was that their main goal for game was running at 30 fps which for this new gen is just awful you should shoot for 60 fps. Seems like they were like oh well x1 hits no lower then 30 fps so no need to lower res from full  1080 p. xbox 360 was knowing for it's pretty good upscale system and seems like x1 has agreat one also. If a game needs to be 720 p - 900 p for 60 fps do it and let x1 system upscale it to1080 p which was done for most games at launch and bf4 looks amazig same with ac4.  

i agree with dmaul if you are a person that is all about amazing looking graphics then pc is what you should be buying that can get ultra settings and not ps4/x1.

 
Last edited by a moderator:
TimboSliceGB said:
i agree with dmaul if you are a person that is all about amazing looking graphics then pc is what you should be buying that can get ultra settings and not ps4/x1.
Click to expand...
Right? Consoles get outpaced by PCs so soon after release, if not beforehand, that the graphical differences between upper-tier consoles are (usually) miniscule.

Am playing some 360 games until Titanfall lands to pull the trigger on an Xbox One. Could get a One now, but I'd just wait for Titanfall anyway. (And even if I saw footage of the 360 version, I'd still pull the trigger on the One version.) Managed to get the 360 backlog down to below 30-physical-games territory.. got about 5-6 weeks to finish off a few more.. can't wait to join y'all.

 
Last edited by a moderator:
I don't know.  I've been gaming my whole life, but I really can not tell the difference between 30 and 60 fps.  I think this argument/debate/butthurting is way overblown.  If I sat someone down in front of an X1 and a PS4 with the respective versions of this game, I HIGHLY doubt they'd turn their nose up at the Xbox One version or notice any discernible difference. 

 
I don't hear anyone disappointed in quality of games out so far since launch on x1. I know for me bf4 on x1 looks just as good as bf3 on my PC at 1080p 60fps. I play games for fun and with friends I'm not going to not have a beans of systems just be cause of those numbers. Everyone knows last fen 360 was little behind but I still played most my games on it. 360 has amazing upscale and looks like x1 has one also. I will admit I seen ps4 and x1 version of bf4 in person I like x1 version better seems like the lighting is better.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
You must log in or register to reply here.
bread's done
Back
Top