Stream XBox Games to Windows 10 is here!

[Misanthrope]

And a happy unbirthday to you!

[TheSLSAMG]

That price point is inaccurate, you're leaving out the original price, the price of playing online (plus the price of your ISP connection) and the price of games compared to the average PC price.

 

Not to mention:

Sheer number of games available (the only point of this is to get console exclusives on PC.....which could be done WAY easier by just freaking porting them)

mods

options out the ass to optimize your system.

 

 

Consoles are going to die, just accept it.

$46/year to play online from Microsoft based on the current price on Amazon for a 12 month card. Remember that the consoles can and do tend to have more optimization than you can shove at a PC with aftermarket mods, numbers don't make for quality titles (take the Call of Duty series for example which is multi-platform, as well all of the Early Access titles on PC) where the Early Access section of Steam is cluttered with half-assed attempts at games that will never be finished and Call of Duty is a game franchise with yearly releases and lately, some of the most appalling AAA titles. As for mods, not everyone in the world is worried about making the main character in the game someone else or making the world look different, some just want an uncomplicated platform where they can sit down, pop in a disc/download a game and relax without tinkering a game to hell and making it a unstable mess (not that you can't sit down at a PC and relax, but PC has multiple content delivery services and multiple ways of obtaining games.

 

As for the price of games, they're not as premium as PC users lead us to believe. Forza Motorsport 5 for example was launched in 2013 for $59.99, and now costs $39.99, but that now comes with all of the DLC which was worth as much as the game itself. Grid Autosport however launched for the same price, and now costs $39.99 without DLC. To be fair, Grid Autosport was launched almost a year later, but it's also a far worse game in almost every single metric.

 

Consoles aren't dying yet, they've got a long way to go. Just because MS and Sony may or may not have gotten off on a bad foot hardware and software wise doesn't mean we can declare one of the most well-known gaming platforms as dead.

[Victorious Secret]

 

 

Consoles aren't dying yet, they've got a long way to go. Just because MS and Sony may or may not have gotten off on a bad foot hardware and software wise doesn't mean we can declare one of the most well-known gaming platforms as dead.

 

According to PC gamers, consoles have been dying for the last couple of generations. 

 

Facts are for 350 dollars you get an all in one gaming console that also handles entertainment duties and acts as a proper hub for everything. 350 dollars.  Maybe a gaming console is the wrong term to use. Maybe a media consumption device that also plays some great games, cause thats how mine gets used. 

 

I just find it amusing. Sony and MS? Damn them. Nintendo? They are our friends. Steam? Oh god, the Steam Machines are truly innovative! 

Gamers are a interesting breed. 

[Trik'Stari]

$46/year to play online from Microsoft based on the current price on Amazon for a 12 month card. Remember that the consoles can and do tend to have more optimization than you can shove at a PC with aftermarket mods, numbers don't make for quality titles (take the Call of Duty series for example which is multi-platform, as well all of the Early Access titles on PC) where the Early Access section of Steam is cluttered with half-assed attempts at games that will never be finished and Call of Duty is a game franchise with yearly releases and lately, some of the most appalling AAA titles. As for mods, not everyone in the world is worried about making the main character in the game someone else or making the world look different, some just want an uncomplicated platform where they can sit down, pop in a disc/download a game and relax without tinkering a game to hell and making it a unstable mess (not that you can't sit down at a PC and relax, but PC has multiple content delivery services and multiple ways of obtaining games.

 

Consoles aren't dying yet, they've got a long way to go. Just because MS and Sony may or may not have gotten off on a bad foot hardware and software wise doesn't mean we can declare one of the most well-known gaming platforms as dead.

1. Laziness is not a valid defense (in my book. you can be just as lazy on a PC, if you want to)

2. Early access is what it is, steam outright tells you that, if you can't be bothered to read that, it's your problem (once again, laziness, not to mention that console releases have had their fair share of problems)

3. Multiple content delivery is actually a benefit, because if you only have one source for online play, and that source has a problem, you're fucked (lizard squad anyone?)

 

There is zero defense for the continued existence of consoles. Please stop defending them. We are in the information age, ignorance is a choice.

 

According to PC gamers, consoles have been dying for the last couple of generations. 

 

Facts are for 350 dollars you get an all in one gaming console that also handles entertainment duties and acts as a proper hub for everything. 350 dollars.  Maybe a gaming console is the wrong term to use. Maybe a media consumption device that also plays some great games, cause thats how mine gets used. 

 

I just find it amusing. Sony and MS? Damn them. Nintendo? They are our friends. Steam? Oh god, the Steam Machines are truly innovative! 

Gamers are a interesting breed. 

 

Nintendo hasn't really been relevant to ANYTHING, in a long time, and this is coming from a former Nintendo fanboy (OoT for life). Yes, there are plenty of things that the consoles can do, except there are.....infinitely more things that PC's can do, including MAC's......so your point is again, invalid. Everything console can do, PC can do better, and more of.

[TheSLSAMG]

According to PC gamers, consoles have been dying for the last couple of generations. 

 

Facts are for 350 dollars you get an all in one gaming console that also handles entertainment duties and acts as a proper hub for everything. 350 dollars.  Maybe a gaming console is the wrong term to use. Maybe a media consumption device that also plays some great games, cause thats how mine gets used. 

 

I just find it amusing. Sony and MS? Damn them. Nintendo? They are our friends. Steam? Oh god, the Steam Machines are truly innovative! 

Gamers are a interesting breed. 

Fuck Nintendo, they're not our friends. Microsoft make the best OS for PC gamers, so I give them that. Sony make some fantastic camera sensors and fuck Steam as well. They've got their heads up their asses and coming far out of their mouths.

[Kamina]

So this gives me the option to play Xbone games on my monitor?

[Victorious Secret]

Fuck Nintendo, they're not our friends. Microsoft make the best OS for PC gamers, so I give them that. Sony make some fantastic camera sensors and fuck Steam as well. They've got their heads up their asses and coming far out of their mouths.

 

Oh I was just commenting on the typical circle jerk about Nintendo. 

Nintendo offers roughly dick of their games on other platforms. But its okay because "their games are fun". Okay. How about Sony and MS? Cause those are some freaking fun games too. But nah, jerk jerk jerk. 

The jerking about Steam is even worse. I'm excited actually to see MSs implementation of gaming and see how well they kick Steam in the ass. 

XBL, as a feature packed service, makes Steam look bad. The integration is so much nicer and the ease of use is better and the customer service actually exists. No wonder Gabe crapped his pants when he caught wind of MSs plans for their PC gaming. Steam, in all honest truth, can't actually handle a proper competitor. They don't know what innovation means. 

 

Hell, EA in less then 5 years made a better distribution service and EA doesn't care on the level that MS does. 

[Trik'Stari]

Fuck Nintendo, they're not our friends. Microsoft make the best OS for PC gamers, so I give them that. Sony make some fantastic camera sensors and fuck Steam as well. They've got their heads up their asses and coming far out of their mouths.

Good to see we agree on something.

 

So this gives me the option to play Xbone games on my monitor?

That's about it.

 

Nintendo offers roughly dick of their games on other platforms. But its okay because "their games are fun". Okay. How about Sony and MS? Cause those are some freaking fun games too. But nah, jerk jerk jerk. 

The jerking about Steam is even worse. I'm excited actually to see MSs implementation of gaming and see how well they kick Steam in the ass. 

 

I will concede those points to you. Steam is kinda......well, Steam.

 

Still, standardized, non upgradeable consoles need to die. If someone made a console, with a full fledged PC os, that was capable of being upgraded, I could support that. Even if the upgrades were proprietary, that would still be better than current consoles.

 

 

Edit, correction FUCK EA. Origin is SHIT. Granted the only thing I play through it is battlefield, and I had to hard restart my PC earlier today because I was playing hardline, got teamkilled whilst jumping from a chopper, which led to a black screen (I assume a kick for....some reason) and then a system lockup that ctrl+alt+del and alt+f4 could not recover from)

[TheSLSAMG]

1. Laziness is not a valid defense (in my book. you can be just as lazy on a PC, if you want to)

2. Early access is what it is, steam outright tells you that, if you can't be bothered to read that, it's your problem (once again, laziness, not to mention that console releases have had their fair share of problems)

3. Multiple content delivery is actually a benefit, because if you only have one source for online play, and that source has a problem, you're fucked (lizard squad anyone?)

 

There is zero defense for the continued existence of consoles. Please stop defending them. We are in the information age, ignorance is a choice.

Multiple content delivery comes with it's upsides and downsides. Yes, redundancy is an upside if content is offered on all platforms, but this also adds fragmentation to the mix. However, multiple content delivery is bad in that there's also a bit more risk. Companies get hacked every day. If you have your credit card information in four different sources (Steam, GMG, Origin and Uplay) as opposed to having your information in a single source (XBL or PSN), who's more at risk? Given any of them can and will have data breaches somewhere down the line, it's not too inaccurate to assume that having your information in a single place is more secure, but it also depends on who the hacker will target.

 

Steam doesn't do a whole lot for people who buy Early Access, they don't even offer a return policy of any type whether Early Access or not. The end user gets all of the responsibility, and that's not exactly fair. The Sale of Goods Act in the UK protects purchasers of material goods against faulty items, and allows returns if such an item is faulty. But in the digital world, it's a big fuck you from Steam.

 

Last I checked, wanting convenience and ease of use is completely different from wanting to remain lazy. Laziness has little to do with ease of use, maybe convenience sure, but not ease of use. I shouldn't feel intimidated when I sit down and play a game, I should feel at home. PC doesn't always do this for the end user, but the consoles are designed to.

[TheSLSAMG]

Good to see we agree on something.

 

That's about it.

 

 

Still, standardized, non upgradeable consoles need to die. If someone made a console, with a full fledged PC os, that was capable of being upgraded, I could support that. Even if the upgrades were proprietary, that would still be better than current consoles.

 

 

Edit, correction FUCK EA. Origin is SHIT. Granted the only thing I play through it is battlefield, and I had to hard restart my PC earlier today because I was playing hardline, got teamkilled whilst jumping from a chopper, which led to a black screen (I assume a kick for....some reason) and then a system lockup that ctrl+alt+del and alt+f4 could not recover from)

Considering Origin has a decent layout in my eyes and they actually offer some sort of buyer protection (in the form of being able to a return a game up to 24 hours after playing or 7 days after purchasing), I'd say it does some stuff better than Steam. As well, I've experienced consistently better network performance from Origin than I have Steam, but that may just be me.

[Victorious Secret]

 

Last I checked, wanting convenience and ease of use is completely different from wanting to remain lazy. Laziness has little to do with ease of use, maybe convenience sure, but not ease of use. I shouldn't feel intimidated when I sit down and play a game, I should feel at home. PC doesn't always do this for the end user, but the consoles are designed to.

 

Thats a big one. I work on computers all day. I don't want to when I get home. I fire up my 130" projector, I load up Halo and I get my friends into a single lobby with unified voice chat. Something PC gaming still hasn't figured out. I don't want to have one app for group voice chat and then another to keep us in a party and all this other crap. 

 

The whole "lazy" argument makes no sense. I bought a 1500 dollar drone (And now a 3500 dollar drone) just to shoot video. I could've built one, for the same price, for more "control" but no. I have no interest in the nuances of building and flying. I have a interest in simply getting a AIO solution that works and works for what I need. 

 

If that kind of attitude constitutes laziness...then I'm the laziest bastard on the face of this planet. 

[Trik'Stari]

Multiple content delivery comes with it's upsides and downsides. Yes, redundancy is an upside if content is offered on all platforms, but this also adds fragmentation to the mix. However, multiple content delivery is bad in that there's also a bit more risk. Companies get hacked every day. If you have your credit card information in four different sources (Steam, GMG, Origin and Uplay) as opposed to having your information in a single source (XBL or PSN), who's more at risk? Given any of them can and will have data breaches somewhere down the line, it's not too inaccurate to assume that having your information in a single place is more secure, but it also depends on who the hacker will target.

 

Steam doesn't do a whole lot for people who buy Early Access, they don't even offer a return policy of any type whether Early Access or not. The end user gets all of the responsibility, and that's not exactly fair. The Sale of Goods Act in the UK protects purchasers of material goods against faulty items, and allows returns if such an item is faulty. But in the digital world, it's a big fuck you from Steam.

 

Last I checked, wanting convenience and ease of use is completely different from wanting to remain lazy. Laziness has little to do with ease of use, maybe convenience sure, but not ease of use. I shouldn't feel intimidated when I sit down and play a game, I should feel at home. PC doesn't always do this for the end user, but the consoles are designed to.

That IS, if you are dumb enough to save your financial information to ANY online account. I refuse to use ANY service that saves it and does not allow you to not save said financial information. Then again, I'm taking network security classes, and paranoid, so I know not to EVER save that kind of information.

 

Considering Origin has a decent layout in my eyes and they actually offer some sort of buyer protection (in the form of being able to a return a game up to 24 hours after playing or 7 days after purchasing), I'd say it does some stuff better than Steam. As well, I've experienced consistently better network performance from Origin than I have Steam, but that may just be me.

I have very little experience with multiplayer via steam, so I can't comment. I have gone through their customer service "process".....and holy fuck, I could have done it faster with a hammer and chisel, This was years ago, needed to recover password, no response for two weeks.

 

Thats a big one. I work on computers all day. I don't want to when I get home. I fire up my 130" projector, I load up Halo and I get my friends into a single lobby with unified voice chat. Something PC gaming still hasn't figured out. I don't want to have one app for group voice chat and then another to keep us in a party and all this other crap. 

 

The whole "lazy" argument makes no sense. I bought a 1500 dollar drone (And now a 3500 dollar drone) just to shoot video. I could've built one, for the same price, for more "control" but no. I have no interest in the nuances of building and flying. I have a interest in simply getting a AIO solution that works and works for what I need. 

 

If that kind of attitude constitutes laziness...then I'm the laziest bastard on the face of this planet. 

 

Is it really that annoyingly difficult to start up teamspeak as well as the game you intend to play?.....if that constitutes difficult, then yes, you are a lazy bastard. And this comes from an admittedly lazy bastard.

 

Edit: addendum, the only time I use TS is for MMO's like SWTOR, and even then I don't always use them. I generally find voice chat to be little more than an annoyance, but that's personal preference. Keep in mind I have a shitty 10Mbps connection, so voice chat is just something taking up that precious bandwidth and causing me lag (century link)

 

2nd Edit: And I'm fairly sure, a few games on PC have built in VOIP, Battlefield does, not sure about CoD because I'm not lowly enough to play CoD. MMO's to my knowledge do not, which is kind of stupid.

[Thought]

This is a good start, but does it have MKB support from the computer to control the console or will you need to sync your controller up with the computer or be within range of your Xbox? So many questions that could be raised about this.

 

I ask once again. Why would anyone do this? Considering that any cpu with 8gb of 1600mhz vram, and intel 4600 graphics runs games better than an Xbone?

Do you fully understand what you said? Because that is horribly wrong. A One would run circles around that computer laughing like a maniac.

[Trik'Stari]

This is a good start, but does it have MKB support from the computer to control the console or will you need to sync your controller up with the computer or be within range of your Xbox? So many questions that could be raised about this.

 

Do you fully understand what you said? Because that is horribly wrong. A One would run circles around that computer laughing like a maniac.

Not from my experience, as I stated earlier, I've run battlefield 4 on intel hd 4600, and it wasn't that bad. Definitely beat the pants off of my AMD A10 5700 APU WITH a GTX 660. Considering that neither the PS4 OR Xbone actually run bf4(or hardline for that matter) at 1080p.....yeah. PC still looking pretty good.

 

[Thought]

Not from my experience, as I stated earlier, I've run battlefield 4 on intel hd 4600, and it wasn't that bad. Definitely beat the pants off of my AMD A10 5700 APU WITH a GTX 660.

Just saying "It wasn't that bad" holds absolutely no weight in an argument. Especially when your "testing" methodology has no thought to it and you're comparing apples to oranges with opinions.

 

Straight facts, the Xbox One is fast. Period. You cannot argue against that because it would be untrue. I've used integrated graphics before, let me tell you that the 7790 in the One is a lot more powerful and delivering the performance and visuals you'll want than going with sub par performance for much more money.

[Trik'Stari]

Just saying "It wasn't that bad" holds absolutely no weight in an argument. Especially when your "testing" methodology has no thought to it and you're comparing apples to oranges with opinions.

 

Straight facts, the Xbox One is fast. Period. You cannot argue against that because it would be untrue. I've used integrated graphics before, let me tell you that the 7790 in the One is a lot more powerful and delivering the performance and visuals you'll want than going with sub par performance for much more money.

Still can't run it at 1080p. Which intel 4600 can.

 

Not to mention that it's not an actual 7790 in the Xbone, it's a 7790 with (I think) 2 cores missing or deactivated.

 

Edit: I cannot find an english video, not sure why

Edit #2: Also, I realize the CPU in the video is a 4770k @3.5ghz. Not sure if that would actually make a difference to the iGPU or not

[Thought]

Still can't run it at 1080p.

 

Not to mention that it's not an actual 7790 in the Xbone, it's a 7790 with (I think) 2 cores missing or deactivated.

Debating semantics on why seems like it'll be pointless with you but I'll give it a shot anyways.

 

The theoretical performance is the same between the One's GPU and the 7790, the only difference is clock speed and memory bank.

 

Why run at 1080p at lower graphical options to maintain a framerate when you can lower the resolution and improve performance and graphical fidelity. Not to mention that no, HD 4600 does not provide as good of an experience because you have to run it at much lower quality settings for an even lower frame rate than the One. Resolution is not everything to gamers, be keen on remembering that.

[JAKEBAB]

omfg i can't believe this thread has turned into a console vs pc bs thread ffs i hate this forum sometimes can't even get news without a shit storm starting

[Thought]

omfg i can't believe this thread has turned into a console vs pc bs thread ffs i hate this forum sometimes can't even get news without a shit storm starting

I guess people really like arguing about things that don't need to be argued about. I'm personally happy that Microsoft is doing this, we need it as a steady start to improve PC gaming as a whole.

[Victorious Secret]

omfg i can't believe this thread has turned into a console vs pc bs thread ffs i hate this forum sometimes can't even get news without a shit storm starting

Moral superiority!

This is the nerd equivalent of arguing about which sports team is better, when both teams are crap and don't amount to much in the grand scheme of life.

[Colonel_Gerdauf]

Still can't run it at 1080p. Which intel 4600 can.

-snip-

Not to mention that it's not an actual 7790 in the Xbone, it's a 7790 with (I think) 2 cores missing or deactivated.

Edit: I cannot find an english video, not sure why

Edit #2: Also, I realize the CPU in the video is a 4770k @3.5ghz. Not sure if that would actually make a difference to the iGPU or not

I am not sure if that was a good video of reference.

The HD 4600 in the video ran Battlefield 4 at the laptop resolution of 1280*768 at the average frame rate of 31 FPS.

Battlefield 4 runs on 720P on the Xbox One (900P on the PS4) at a fairly steady 60 FPS.

In the battle between resolution, frame rate, and fidelity (something that gamers with even the beefiest PCs need to compromise on to a point), frame rate takes the highest priority when it comes to shooters.

You can technically tone down the fidelity to get the stable 60 FPS, but then you would be making the same compromises that the consoles are making.

[niofalpha]

Microsoft: We released a way for you to stream an Xbox One Game to your Windows 10

PCMR people: Absoulutely pointless!

Valve: You can stream from a PC to ANOTHER PC

PCMR: SOOO INOVATIVE 10/10 Would buy again.

 

OT: I can see this being very useful, feature. I for one use my Xbone commonly, but have a Shit mic and I commonly play with my same group of friends so this makes it easier to communicate.

[jbslayer]

Still can't run it at 1080p. Which intel 4600 can.

 

Not to mention that it's not an actual 7790 in the Xbone, it's a 7790 with (I think) 2 cores missing or deactivated.

 

Edit: I cannot find an english video, not sure why

Edit #2: Also, I realize the CPU in the video is a 4770k @3.5ghz. Not sure if that would actually make a difference to the iGPU or not

Are you sure you watched the video you posted? The options screen at 1:09 in the video clearly showed the game was running at 1280x768 which doesn't equal to 1080p. Not to mention it stuttered like crazy while he was playing it. So please do us a favor, and not make false claims.

 

Now to be on topic. I can't wait to try streaming my xbox games to my pc because I'll be able to multitask like watching netflix or twitch.tv while playing Halo or Forza

[Xorbot]

Play Halo on your PC by using a graphically under-powered source, degrading the image quality via video compression, and sending it to your PC while introducing a tiny amount of input lag.

 

2015 is has such advanced technology.

[bob345]

Why the hell would i want to stream from a console when my local hardware would run the game much better? I would much rathe have it the other way around where the xbox one streams my pc games.