Support NeoGAF

[DopeyFish]

If they do (or more correctly, when they do), it will be because of mostly first party titles. Most publishers are not going to fully commit to the next generation until the PS3 launches. The XBoxNext will get some great games, but there will be a distinct lack of "next generation" 3rd party support. Although, I don't agree with him much, MP also expects muted support, mostly for publishers financial reasons.

I think the whole idea Microsoft has... is to leverage XNA. If Xbox 2 really takes off a whole year/year and a half before PS3, developers will start concentrating on Xbox 2 titles and possibly scrapping PS2/GC ports on multiconsole titles because of the vast difference in detailing. Of course there are the companies that will do the low-res models/textures and have a COMPLETELY different engine. which in turn would start lowering the game count on PS2, and could adversely effect the populations mind on where to get the good games.

Then what happens is PS3 comes out, and looks a TINY bit better and people already have their Xbox2, people are already enjoying themselves with some great next-gen games. (remember analysts themselves are saying next-gen graphics are going to look so similar that buying one over the other because of such would be silly)

Though this would be like a whole chain of events, and I think it's possible it can be pulled off. It's going to be really interesting how this all plays out.

 

[sonycowboy]

That's just not true. MS has done an outstanding job of getting virtually all major publishers working on XB2 projects. If Pachter believes otherwise, he is clueless. Actually, he is pretty clueless based on most of the rubbish he usually comes out with.

Whether the launch titles will be good or fully take advantage of the hardware remains to be seen. But everyone wants to get in with some launch titles, because they will sell well regardless.

Every major publisher will have titles out, of course. The point is that most publishers will not magically switch over their development efforts to the next gen systems when

a) The cost is so high
b) The return is so low (in the early stages of a cycle)
c) Their is so much more money to be made with the older consoles.

As I said in a previous thread, I think that this could work out in the XboxNext's favor. Only a few extremely high quality unique titles developed for the system, with the "mass market" titles going to the older systems. That could give the XboxNext a significant cachet.

However, no publisher expects to gain significant revenue from the XboxNext in 2005/early 2006. They will have expectations for individual titles, but overall they will not be significant.

 

[element]

Not 1/10th as into next-gen development as they are into This gen development, which is my point as well as Wedbush's.

most of the people i've talked to are working on or will be working on next-gen stuff in the coming months.

 

[sonycowboy]

Then what happens is PS3 comes out, and looks a TINY bit better and people already have their Xbox2, people are already enjoying themselves with some great next-gen games. (remember analysts themselves are saying next-gen graphics are going to look so similar that buying one over the other because of such would be silly.

I find this very comical.

When the Xbox is more powerful than the PS2 by a small amount, it crushes it graphically.

When/If the PS3 is more powerful than the Xbox by ~some amount, it won't make a difference.

Seems to be a selective interpretation by fans of a certain system.

 

[element]

Seems to be a selective interpretation by fans of a certain system.

this coming from a guy who name is 'SonyCowboy'

:lol

 

[Lord Error]

I don't know how significant it really is for the rest of the world, but the way I see it, importance of backwards compatibility is threefold:

1. It allows you to trade in your old console when buying the new one, where you save some money.
2. Gives a first time franchize buyer a a lot more value for his money (this is something MS should actually be a lot more concerned about than Sony even. Everyone and their mother will have a PS2, but if Microsoft wants to attract those buyers to themselves, they'd do good to have as large software library available as possible, otherwise why should anyone switch, when PS3 will have "all that, plus the old stuff I already have?").
3. Less clutter around your TV, as you keep one device less under it. This is actually the most important factor to me. I hate cable clutter, switchers, etc. and convenience is what consoles are supposed to be all about.

Benefit for the developers is obvious as it gives them even larger userbase to make their less expensive games for (if there's a little nice new, inovative puzzle game being made for PS2 in 2007, people with PS3 would buy it as well) It also gives them simple satisfaction of knowing that their games aren't all of a sudden become irrelevant - that they are preserved for years to come. I know historical preservation of games is probably not very high on Sony's bulletpoint list (then again, maybe it is - look at the Playstation history exhibition?) but it definitely ties in nicely with other benefits.

this coming from a guy who name is 'SonyCowboy'

Well, doesn't he actually have a point, regardless of his name?

 

[Insertia]

The market leader will have BC and will probably also have the graphics advantage. If M$ wants to stay in the game they can't give Sony too much leverage.

If both Revolution and PS3 are BC, that will be another +1 thing over Xbox2.

I find this very comical.

When the Xbox is more powerful than the PS2 by a small amount, it crushes it graphically.

When/If the PS3 is more powerful than the Xbox by ~some amount, it won't make a difference.

Seems to be a selective interpretation by fans of a certain system.

IAWTP

 

[sonycowboy]

this coming from a guy who name is 'SonyCowboy'

:lol

When you can't attack the message, attack the messenger. Please tell me you don't find some irony in the argument. I'm not saying the argument is true or valid or anything of the sort. It's just funny how one can get caught on the wrong side of their own argument.

 

[davis]

I still think its possible they might include it even though most signs are pointing to no. Only reason they wouldn't is to cut cost, but this is the richest company in the world so why not include BC and have it as a suprise "Xbox 2 to be Backwards Compatible!" a little whle before release. Remember the naysayers saying having ps1 on ps2 would be nearly impossible before it finally came out with it. That 10% does sound about right but I would guess those are a lot of the type of gamers that could really help a systems success or failure and let's face it MS needs all the help it can get to gain marketshare. Not only that but the Xbox is already sitting next to my tv(can't fit it in the shelf below) it is about 5 times the size of my GC and twice that of my PS2, who the heck wants to have 10 things under the tv or something taking up so much space? Not having BC is a big turn off to me if any the companies decide not to have it.

 

[krypt0nian]

I find this very comical.

When the Xbox is more powerful than the PS2 by a small amount, it crushes it graphically.

When/If the PS3 is more powerful than the Xbox by ~some amount, it won't make a difference.

Seems to be a selective interpretation by fans of a certain system.

Big time!

 

[Che]

Like someone said before...

- 1st Microsoft console = Gaining the heart of gamers (power + online)
- 2nd Microsoft console = Gaining the heart of shareholders (profitability)

Well that depends. If MS becomes that stingy they appear nowadays (cancelling games, no backwards compatability, some HDD rumors) Xbox 2 will become shareholders nightmare. Casual gamers are stupid but not that stupid.

 

[davis]

I don't know how significant it really is for the rest of the world, but the way I see it, importance of backwards compatibility is threefold:

1. It allows you to trade in your old console when buying the new one, where you save some money.

true also some will just give it to a friend or familymember without one, some will argue this is a negative but I don't agree since I know it has got a couple people that wouldn't have been into gaming hooked now.

 

[MightyHedgehog]

Well that pretty much guarantees that I will not buy the Xbox 2 at least until after a year or more of it's release. I just got an Xbox in April so I'm in no hurry to buy another console unless I can play the Xbox games I currently have in it.

I don't get it. You got the system. When the new system comes out, you'll still be able to play the XBOX 1 titles on the XBOX 1 you bought. Why would XBOX 2 not having BC mean anything different to you? So you can't sell the XBOX 1 off for $20-30 (likely worth of a used XBOX 1 by XBOX 2 launch) at XBOX 2 launch, is that it? I dont' see the point.

 

[DrGAKMAN]

Word.

Just listen to all these arm chair analysts. You guys should let the MS execs run their business however they see fit. They are one of the most successful corporations in the world. They know best.

I fully support their decision not to offer BC in the Xbox 2 because BC would only complicate matters for them. Now they can focus on having the Xbox 2 ready for a Fall 2005 launch in the states (which I fully support). This gen started getting stale a while ago imo and 2004 looks like it will be the last year for some truly good games. It's time to move on. Thankfully MS will be leading the way.

The arguments of BC have been beaten to DEATH recently, but I think it's 'cos of current X-BOX owners who don't see the need to play existing X-BOX games 'cos they already own an X-BOX. BUT WHAT ABOUT PEOPLE WHO DON'T HAVE THE CURRENT X-BOX??? Think outside your own minds here, ya'll might think that there's this huge collective of X-BOX enthusiests, but it's a fraction of the Playstation faithful. These Playstation fans may be potential X-BOX Next fans, but when they see that it won't be able to play existing X-BOX games, is actually less featureful AND won't be as powerful as PS3, guess what, they're gonna wait for PS3 instead.

Plus another valid argument is that without BC an early launch just means cutting the current X-BOX short. This X-BOX owner I'm quoting right now is proof of that, he believes that there's nothing good coming out for the rest of this generation. Maybe not on X-BOX, but with Nintendo & Sony more cleanly finnishing up this generation the market will SEE them and their system's as being more valuable 'cos they lasted longer. Sony will be doing stuff with PSP & EyeToy, will have the next Tekken, FF and loads of others to help them thru next year. Nintendo will have thier own peripherals, their own exclussive franchises and of course the realistic Zelda next year. I'm not saying Microsoft won't have anything next year, but with them shifting focus so soon and wanting to have a good X-BOX Next launch all without BC to help their supporters (gamers & game makers) thru the transition...I just don't see it!

 

[sonycowboy]

Um, comparing a gap of one year+ between xbox and PS2 vs. the supposed 3-4 months that could separate the launches of the Xbox2 and Ps3, cheech? Yeah, I'd say meager differences for the latter.

This man sees the future. So PS3 will come out 3-4 months after the Xbox debuts in 2005?? And you've been given the specs of the graphics output of both the Xbox2 and the PS3?

AMAZING.

Yeah, I'd say meager differences for the latter.

We see what we want to see I guess.

 

[element]

1. It allows you to trade in your old console when buying the new one, where you save some money.

I dont think retailers will be ready to do this like they did with the previous two system launches (SNES > PSX/N64 and PSX > PS2/Xbox/Gamecube)

Many stores got burnt like crazy with trade in, thinking they could sell games and systems for a profit. But most went to computer recycle or were written off. Look what happened with stores with the launch of the Cube and Xbox, attachment rate was the most important thing. The more you bought the better the deal, not the more you traded in. When a kid goes in and only gets $5 for a game that is six months old and $50 for a system, they aren't going to trade it in.

 

[human5892]

Um, comparing a gap of one year+ between xbox and PS2 vs. the supposed 3-4 months that could separate the launches of the Xbox2 and Ps3, cheech? Yeah, I'd say major visual differences for the former, and meager differences for the latter. Do you see the Xbox crushing the gamecube, visually? if so, I'd say RE4 might have you thinking otherwise.

It's getting pretty tiring to continue to hear some people vehemently insisting that the Xbox will come out within a few months of the PS3 in 2006/7 when virtually every single source cited says otherwise.

 

[human5892]

I dont think retailers will be ready to do this like they did with the previous two system launches (SNES > PSX/N64 and PSX > PS2/Xbox/Gamecube)

Many stores got burnt like crazy with trade in, thinking they could sell games and systems for a profit. But most went to computer recycle or were written off. Look what happened with stores with the launch of the Cube and Xbox, attachment rate was the most important thing. The more you bought the better the deal, not the more you traded in. When a kid goes in and only gets $5 for a game that is six months old and $50 for a system, they aren't going to trade it in.

Even if this is true, you'll still be able to knock the cost of a new system down somewhat, and that's better than nothing, particularly for those of us who don't have a whole lot of money to throw around in the first place.

 

[DrGAKMAN]

All symptoms of FEAR!

 

[element]

Even if this is true, you'll still be able to knock the cost of a new system down somewhat, and that's better than nothing, particularly for those of us who don't have a whole lot of money to throw around in the first place.

If you are trying to save a couple $$$ here and there, you probably shouldn't be buying a console when it first comes out in the first place.

 

[sonycowboy]

I dont think retailers will be ready to do this like they did with the previous two system launches (SNES > PSX/N64 and PSX > PS2/Xbox/Gamecube)

Many stores got burnt like crazy with trade in, thinking they could sell games and systems for a profit.

LOL. I guess most stores other than EB & Gamestop who were making mad money off of used systems and games according to all of thier earnings releases in 2000/2001.

But most went to computer recycle or were written off.

LOL. Now you're just pulling stuff out of your arse.

 

[human5892]

If you are trying to save a couple $$$ here and there, you probably shouldn't be buying a console when it first comes out in the first place.

Why not? Maybe I've been saving up for it for a year or two, putting extra money aside when possible. An extra $30 or $40 off the launch price could make or break someone being able to feel the excitement of waiting in line to pick it up on day one or having to get it a few weeks later.

Or, think of it this way: if you can nab $30 or $40 for your old console, that's almost one more game you can get for your new one...or maybe an old game from the previous generation that you still want to play (which, of course, you can, since your new console is BC...assuming it isn't an Xbox2 ).

 

[element]

Well when TRU was offering $10 for any 16 bit system game without box or instructions, when PSone, Saturn, and N64 were out. I don't see how they could have made a profit on it.
Not to mention stores getting countless copies of EA Sports games and what not.

I'm not saying there isn't a maket for pre-owned games, but I personally believe it will be signifigantly less then previous generations. Mostly because the margin isn't as great. Stores aren't willing to shell out as much cash as they used too and gamers are willing to just keep their games.

Or, think of it this way: if you can nab $30 or $40 for your old console, that's almost one more game you can get for your new one...or maybe an old game from the previous generation that you still want to play (which, of course, you can, since your new console is BC...assuming it isn't an Xbox2 ).

Then wait a week or two for pay day. Recycle some soda cans.

 

[BeOnEdge]

i'd say a smooth transition of XBL services to the new online titles ie simply plugging in your user info on the x2 and having it work out the gate>>>>>>>>>>>>>>backward compatibility.

 

[element]

i'd say a smooth transition of XBL services to the new online titles ie simply plugging in your user info on the x2 and having it work out the gate>>>>>>>>>>>>>>backward compatibility.

So true.

 

[IJoel]

i'd say a smooth transition of XBL services to the new online titles ie simply plugging in your user info on the x2 and having it work out the gate>>>>>>>>>>>>>>backward compatibility.

What's the challenge in this? Of course this will work fine, this is a server based application. All that info is located in MS' servers. Enter your Gamer Tag and your last CC # digits and that's it. I mean, it's not because of it being a challenge or not, but because it's obvious this will have no problems.

 

[BeOnEdge]

no challenge but the benefit of having online games AT LAUNCH with no hassle.

 

[DrGAKMAN]

You can't blame them, Microsoft has trained them to get whatever they want. Why...'cos Microsoft has so much money. They believe, collectivly, that by Microsoft saving money on BC they'll be able to get the next GTA exclussive, or Madden exclussive *cough*FATCHANCE*cough*. Some of them even believe that Microsoft will still give them BC even though it's very improbable. Some even believe that it'll come out 6 months before PS3 *cough*delusional*cough* with even more powerful specifications *cough*denial*cough* when the writing on the wall says that Microsoft is going for a lower cost model ~a year~ or more before PS3 even comes out. Yeah guys, classic symptoms of fear. Then they go on to believe that developers/publishers love the idea of jumping completly into new platforms all while ignoring the money they could instead make on existing ones with larger user-bases to milk, lower production costs and more learned tools to work with...it's this magical thing called XNA...and it's the saviour of our industry. It means instant profits day one of X-BOX Next's launch and all they have to do is abandon the market leader with the largest userbase of consoles ever who's on such a roll that their next system will likely follow suit...join the collective, resistance is futile, the future is now and all that jazz. Pfft...

 

[element]

What's the challenge in this? Of course this will work fine, this is a server based application. All that info is located in MS' servers. Enter your Gamer Tag and your last CC # digits and that's it. I mean, it's not because of it being a challenge or not, but because it's obvious this will have no problems.

you would be surprised how many people dont think this would happen.

when the writing on the wall says that Microsoft is going for a lower cost model

This is a total misconception. MS isn't going for a lower cost model. They are building a cost efficent system. This doesn't mean they are using cheap parts, or going with less powerful specs. Just means that this system is FAR better planned then the previous one. Costs can be controlled in Xbox 2, where they couldn't in Xbox 1. Total misconception that cutting costs means using cheap stuff.

more learned tools to work with...it's this magical thing called XNA...and it's the saviour of our industry.

Developers already have XNA tools with them, hell some have been using them for years (XACT Xbox Audio) and other tools. XNA is just like DirectX 10 year ago. Just giving developers a foundation to work on to make things easier to build upon. It isn't going to remove 3D Studio Max or Maya or Photoshop. This is something the console industry has needed for years, and why there is a huge quality disparity between games.

 

[BeOnEdge]

yes gakman. forget the fact that everyones userbase starts at zero next gen. sony can guarantee million sellers on day one! there will be NO loyalty to any company around launch. they will lead you to believe their is but the minute either 3 consoles starts to get an edge, that system will get the most support. you cant guarantee that will be sony. if the world were that way, nintendo and the n64 would have owned last gen.

 

[DrGAKMAN]

Hey...thanks for not reading...I said that alot of the X-BOX collective believes that game makers will just ditch the current market leader for some premature X-BOX Next launch.

 

[FinFan]

Launch price of $249.99 and BC won't be an issue.

Make me by a $700 bundle like the last time full of crap I don't want and I'll kill everyone in marketing!!!

 

[IJoel]

no challenge but the benefit of having online games AT LAUNCH with no hassle.

Well, again, duh! It wouldn't be anything new. Unlike this generation, where online gaming started going mainstream. Online games are no longer a novelty.

Seriously, I'm a big Xbox fan, but there's simply no positive side out of this, unless you are MS and want to save money. I will certainly buy the Xbox 2 when it comes out regardless, but from a marketing perspective, it's a feature the other two consoles will have that the Xbox won't.

 

[OG_Original Gamer]

Is porting a possilbiltiy, Halo2 should be ported to Xbox2. Just send MS your receipt or when you purchase the game you are given a card acknowledging your purchase. The Xbox2 is released along with a ported Halo2, you bring your card and you get your Xbox1 Halo2 replaced with the ported version. Just put all info on a memory card that can be used on the Xbox2.

 

[FinFan]

Is porting a possilbiltiy, Halo2 should be ported to Xbox2. Just send MS your receipt or when you purchase the game you are given a card acknowledging your purchase. The Xbox2 is released along with a ported Halo2, you bring your card and you get your Xbox1 Halo2 replaced with the ported version. Just put all info on a memory card that can be used on the Xbox2.

 

[element]

Is porting a possilbiltiy, Halo2 should be ported to Xbox2. Just send MS your receipt or when you purchase the game you are given a card acknowledging your purchase. The Xbox2 is released along with a ported Halo2, you bring your card and you get your Xbox1 Halo2 replaced with the ported version. Just put all info on a memory card that can be used on the Xbox2.

I can't believe I just read that.

 

[rastex]

element man, why do you argue with these people? I know you're privy to a TON of confidential information so how can you even bother responding to these people's outsider perspectives?

 

[Lord Error]

I dont think retailers will be ready to do this like they did with the previous two system launches (SNES > PSX/N64 and PSX > PS2/Xbox/Gamecube)

Whatever pans out I think it will be very easy to get $50 for a PS2 or Xbox by the time their successors launch. I don't see retailers refusing to buy used consoles anytime soon, they make lots of money on that, and in fact expect to make even more in the years to follow (that's what I've read in some EB report, concall, or something like that). $50 is not much, but it's not bad - it lets you buy one game more than you would, or an accessory, or something. I'm not gonna do that, mind you, I'm keeping old machines for the collection purposes, but that's certainly some savings for people who want to do it.

 

[element]

element man, why do you argue with these people? I know you're privy to a TON of confidential information so how can you even bother responding to these people's outsider perspectives?

bordem. and i try to correct the incorrect in some of these threads, like the misconception about 'cutting costs'. Other stuff is just me ranting

 

[IJoel]

element man, why do you argue with these people? I know you're privy to a TON of confidential information so how can you even bother responding to these people's outsider perspectives?

Maybe because those 'outsiders' are backers or the same customers that will or could support the Xbox 2.

Or maybe, just maybe, because that's the purpose of an internet forum: to exchange ideas and have discussions.

 

[sonycowboy]

Maybe because those 'outsiders' are backers or the same customers that will or could support the Xbox 2.

Or maybe, just maybe, because that's the purpose of an internet forum: to exchange ideas and have discussions.

Or maybe he isn't the only with with InSIder InDUSTRee InfORmaTioN. There are a number of members here with connections. That's part of what makes this the best VG forum on the net.

 

[rastex]

Maybe because those 'outsiders' are backers or the same customers that will or could support the Xbox 2.

Or maybe, just maybe, because that's the purpose of an internet forum: to exchange ideas and have discussions.

These "discussions" are based on pure speculation. Element has access to FACTS, but cannot divulge them due to NDAs and all of that. And all this speculation and discussion is for nought since the hardware will come out and people can decide if they like it or not based on what actually exists.

Anyway, element answered my question so I'm satisfied. It's just that since I've started working where I work I read these threads and my mind just boggles at what some people say, I mean they're so friggin uninformed and spout stuff off like it's gospel and it's just so frustrating. I guess I should take a far more lighthearted approach to it and try to take amusement from their speculation, but I care too much

 

[element]

most of my posts on things like this are just rants or opinions about how people are cheap bastards and how supporting an old technolgy doesn't help you advance with new technologies.

i can get frustrating seeing a lot of misconceptions and just flat out lies, but i deal.

I guess I should take a far more lighthearted approach to it and try to take amusement from their speculation, but I care too much

That is really hard to do. I can relate to the caring too much.

 

[akascream]

Look at the bright side. Maybe MS will put out Halo1/2 on Xbox2 with an improved framerate, AA/AF, and maybe a visual upgrade. I'd sure as hell buy them again.

 

[FightyF]

The arguments of BC have been beaten to DEATH recently, but I think it's 'cos of current X-BOX owners who don't see the need to play existing X-BOX games 'cos they already own an X-BOX. BUT WHAT ABOUT PEOPLE WHO DON'T HAVE THE CURRENT X-BOX???

The same situations occurred in the past, when the Genesis replaced the SMS, when the SNES replaced the NES, and when the N64 replaced the SNES. All 3 replacors did well, and all the consoles replaced did well after the debut of a new console.

Do you think Nintendo made huge mistake by releasing an N64 that was not backwards compatible with the SNES? I mean, what if people didn't own an SNES, as you put it? Doing so would have jacked up the price, by at least $50. The N64 wasn't cheap to start out with, so it would not make sense to introduce new cutting edge technology for a price higher than it's worth, just because you want to add some old technology to it.

Backwards compatibility is too costly. If the console cannot be emulated, then it must be included in hardware, and we all know how expensive the Xbox is to manufacture. It would jack up the console price by at least $100.

If gamers don't have an Xbox, then they should buy it. By the time Xbox2 is out, the Xbox's price could sit around the $100 range, making it very affordable.

Also consider that it looks like Xbox Live accounts are "Backwards Compatible", in that when I purchase Live, I can use it for multiple consoles. I find this far more important than being able to play Xbox games on Xbox2.

Marconelly made some good points about the benefits of BC. But those benefits aren't worth the extra money spent on the console. With the $100 saved, you can buy very nice, stylish, and practical switchers that allow you to switch between consoles.

In my opinion, technology cannot allow itself to be shackled by the past. By moving forward, Sony, MS, and Nintendo will have technologies that will sell on their own merits, not on the products gained from past technologies.

What worries me most as an Xbox fan is the rumours that it will not have a HDD. It's one reason why I favour the Xbox over the PS2 and GC. It was an edge for them in this generation. It should be a standard for the next generation.

 

[Mashing]

Launch price of $249.99 and BC won't be an issue.

Make me by a $700 bundle like the last time full of crap I don't want and I'll kill everyone in marketing!!!

IAWTP... I hate having to buy shit in bundles...

That's why I camped out at wal-mart last year (which is a lot of fun incidentally).

 

[xsarien]

It's going to be really fun around here when Microsoft re-releases Halo 1 for the XBox 2, and the banshee-like screaming of "OMG TEH MILKING!" starts up with such precision, you'll be able to set a fucking Rolex by it.

You can only benefit from having backwards compatibilty, and Microsoft not being able to say that you can play the handful of XBox games that actually are worth a damn on the XBox 2 is a point lost in their column.

But continue running the damage control people, it's hysterical.

 

[IJoel]

most of my posts on things like this are just rants or opinions about how people are cheap bastards and how supporting an old technolgy doesn't help you advance with new technologies.

i can get frustrating seeing a lot of misconceptions and just flat out lies, but i deal.

That is really hard to do. I can relate to the caring too much.

This is certainly speculation, and well, MS hasn't given a real answer and all leads to a non-BC Xbox 2. Again speculation.

But, the main issue at hand is how is (or not) BC a value added to a console. Yes, you will think that you don't buy a console to play old games, and I don't either. But it's arguable that many people do. In any case, a non-BC Xbox 2 is certainly a minus for the consumer whether they use it or not. And if this means, less features than Xbox (features made possible by the existance of a built in HD), then it's not even arguable.

 

[ypo]

You know what's a flat out lie? Claiming all Xbox games will be 60 fps locked. What kind of delusional tard actually believes that? Answer: the so called "Insider" with great wealth of inside knowledge.

 

[element]

You know what's a flat out lie? Claiming all Xbox games will be 60 fps locked. What kind of delusional tard actually believes that? Answer: the so called "Insider" with great wealth of inside knowledge.

huh? are you talking to me? I never said all Xbox games would be locked at 60 FPS.