Topic: Official Push Square Xbox Thread

I very much doubt MS are interested in leaving the console space. Yes the XB1 may not of sold like the PS4 has but its still sold more than the XB360 managed at the same point and still sold more than WiiU. It seems they are more interested in merging their Windows 10 PC gaming Market and its Xbox console market to make a MUCH bigger user base. Instead of looking at it that the 'exclusives' are no longer 'console' locked. the games are now MS windows 10 locked (not available to ALL PC owners, just Windows 10 PC's) and the potential user base its MUCH bigger than Sony has with its PS4. As a gamer, that also opens up the possibility of playing online games with full lobbies, better ping and experience,. The games are playable across both platforms and its not like you have to buy the PC version (unless you choose to buy physical) and can be more flexible where you play. MS are essentially merging PC gaming and Console gaming into 1, much bigger user base. Some of the 'benefits' of Consoles are being added to Win10 and some of the benefits of PC's are being added to the Console. MS won't care too much if you don't buy the next Xbox but game on a Win10 PC, play with your Xbox friends, earn Xbox style achievements and more importantly buy their software - its better than losing that sale to Sony or Nintendo. They are offering you the chance to play a game on your PC and then carry on where you left off on your console or vice versa. Your Xbox Profile is also your Win10 PC gaming profile.

Its possible that the Xbox could become more a gaming PC than a 'console' but lets be honest, Consoles these days seem to be more multi-media hubs anyway. The PS4 can play Blurays, has an internet browser and streaming apps. I doubt MS will make a full blown PC as I expect it to be optimised more for gaming than general use like a PC but I still expect it to have multi-media functionality.

I am not saying that what MS are doing is the right (or wrong) way to go about the future for gaming. Its just a different way to what we have seen before but they are able to go this route because of their domination in PC Operating Systems. Sony and Nintendo can't exactly offer the same. Like I said its not 'every' PC that will have access to these 'exclusives' - just those that are Win10. Microsoft's exclusives have the potential to reach far more gamers than Sony's can and why shouldn't MS sell their games to other MS users and only limit it to those specifically on Xbox? Maybe it will mean that Nintendo and Sony owners won't buy an Xbox in the future to play exclusives as they own a win10 PC and can game on that, but for MS its still an extra game sale - an extra person on their network, using their products, increasing their overall user base etc...

I can see MS offering a new, updated Xbox every 3-4years that is more like upgrading your PC's hardware. It will continue to play the games in your library - some at increased visual quality and performance (you won't get a game capped at 1080/30 suddenly running at 4k/60 without some developer patch) but you could see performance/resolution increases in games that are unlocked - maybe even access to settings like PC gamers have - like resolution, visual quality etc. That is the vision and future that MS appear to be moving towards with its console. It will still probably be 'underpowered' compared to a high-end PC but optimised for gaming and have the usual multi-media functionality but completely compatible with Win10 PC's inc game chat, cross-play etc

Sony are unlikely to change their formula and will no doubt release a 'new generation' Playstation every 5yrs+ (depending on the market and technology). Every new generation will be an evolution and compatibility with previous software may or may not work - I don't see it as a priority for Sony and leaves them free to look forward rather than consider old software and its (hardware) needs. If it works out then 'bonus' if not, they have a new, more powerful console to offer us. Whether we see another 'Pro' type mid-term upgrade will vwry much depend on the technology around it. If the PSVR2 requires more power to get the best out of it, 8k screens are available and selling better than 4k, or even a 'new' or better HDR implementation requiring more power, then its possible. I know the PS4 can play PSVR, can offer HDR and 1080p screens are still the most common, but the Pro enhances these and is more about the next 2years+ than the previous 3. I can only see 4k HDR becoming more popular in peoples houses ad as game development continues to grow, I can see fewer and fewer games hitting even 1080p so those who do upgrade their TV will certainly notice the visual decline after its upscaled more than 400%.

MS may well be late to the VR and UHD (over 1080p) gaming, may well be merging the best of PC with Consoles (and vice versa), may well not have had the 'sales' they hoped for with the XB1 but its still in a good way for the future and certainly don't appear to be looking to make their 'final' console - at least not to me.

@KratosMD: It's not about hiccups or anything like that. Microsoft aren't having a Wii U or Vita moment with the Xbox One. It's their most successful console. It's one of the fastest selling consoles of all time.

The reason I wouldn't be surprised for Xbox to get out of gaming hardware isn't anything to do with the perceived failures of the Xbox One. It's down to the business that Microsoft is, and their long term goals within the industry.

Look at Nintendo. You mention them having a failure with the Wii U. Yup. But for them to get out of hardware (which, incidentally, I think would be awesome for me) is a huge decision because they make all of their money from video games - hardware, software, merch. That's their whole business.

Sony have their fingers in lots of pies, many of which are struggling. They make premium hardware that people aren't necessarily buying as much of in the current economical climate, and their phone business has been annihilated by Samsung and Apple. Their movies aren't making as much money as they were. Their insurance is doing pretty well. Music is whatever. PS4 is one of the only aspects of their business that is a legitimate success, and PlayStation, generally, has been a really strong brand since it began in the mid-90s.

Conversely, Microsoft is a company that makes a hell of a lot of money from software - Windows and Office mainly - and very little (or it actually loses money according to many reports) from Xbox. If they dropped Xbox right this second it would make very little difference to their business whereas it would be catastrophic for Sony or Nintendo to do the same.

I'm not saying that Microsoft will get out of hardware. All I'm saying is that out of the three console manufacturers we have today, they have the least to gain by staying in the business. Some see them sending their console exclusives to PC as evidence that their long-term strategy has changed from taking over the living room to amalgamating their PC and console brands under one Xbox umbrella that will continue to exist as a service or an app or something. I don't think that sounds crazy.

It wouldn't surprise me to see Microsoft walk away from consoles. But then it also wouldn't surprise me to see them simply move away from the generational battle with Sony and do their own thing, similar to how Nintendo have. Or for them to just continue as is. They've got so much money in the bank and they make so much from other things that their future is a lot less certain, I think.

If anyone knows the history of MS the only reason they created the Xbox was so they could sell games. Back when they created the original Xbox console gaming was making a whole lot more money then PC gaming at the time. Microsoft just came out with their DirectX which made it easier to make games across a variety of PCs. Bill Gates saw that with the PS2 game systems could do much more then just game systems, fun fact the driving power behind earlier PS2 sales was the fact that t could play DVDS. It increased DVD sales in Japan (which earned more money fo Sony via their movie portfolio) ten fold and was alot of people's first DVD player. Bill Gates thought the Xbox could do the same for Microsoft. Introduce a console that was basically an introductory PC with games using Direct X which would create more money via MS software portfolio. Thus the Direct X Box or Xbox was created.

With that short history lesoon I don't think MS will leave the console business and quite frankly anyone who does just doesn't know business or a Sony, Nintendo fanboy and that explains it. MS has said it themselves that they want to put in end to console generations and that's what I think their plan is with the Scorpio, a console that is more PC then game console. Where you can upgrade parts like a PC yearly or however often and all Xbox games can run on a single system something like PC games.

Much like how Nintendo seems to be focusing on the Mobile gaming market with the Switch, MS is focusing more on the PC side.

@Tasuki: but if every xbox game is coming to PC, then whats the point in owning an xbox?

@FullbringIchigo: Yep pretty much what @KratosMD said, and that was the driving force behind MS creating the Xbox. As I said back when the original Xbox was conceived, PC gaming wasn't big like it is now more of a niche thing.

One of the reasons was the cost of a video game console vs a gaming PC. Another reason was how complex PCs seem to be at that time. In MS eyes what good is selling software if no one owns the hardware.

@FullbringIchigo: not EVERY game will be available on ALL PC's. For a start you need to have a Windows 10 PC and create an Xbox style profile to play the games that are 'exclusive' to both. Assuming you want to just buy an Xbox for exclusives as you get gaming met by other consoles, its cheaper to buy an XB1s than go out and buy a win10 gaming PC to play these exclusives. Not everyone wants to game on PC's so the console also caters to them. With both a Win10 gaming PC and Xbox, You can buy the game once for both platform which may suit certain people and set-ups. All MS are doing is basically extending and uniting their Win10 PC and Xbox market and user base - amalgamating them into one platform essentially. It doesn't matter if you game on one or the other or both. They are trying to do away with the PC vs Xbox and uniting them as one united platform. If, for example, you buy Forza Horizon 3 or Gears 4, you are not separated from each other but can play online together, chat together etc as if they were all on one console. What MS are doing is making the 'hardware' almost unimportant. It won't matter if you own a PC or Xbox, all MS games will be available on both, all games play across MS servers together as one united MS user community. You won't know if the person you are playing with is on console or PC, their profile is the same style, they both have the same achievements, same chat options etc. Your profile is the same for both Win10 and for Xbox - without this, you can't play their Win10/Xbox exclusives - its not the same as Tomb Raider for example which had a PC release - These games are only available in the MS store (the same as the store for Xbox), only available on Win10 and require an Xbox profile. Its NOT every PC. Your cloud saves work on both systems - meaning that if you start playing on one system, you can load up the game on another and carry on from the last point. In essence its more like win10 allows you to carry your Xbox onto a Win10 PC but if you don't have an Xbox but do own a Win10 PC, you can still set up an 'Xbox' account and play Xbox exclusives - like Forza, Gears, etc. Owning a PC isn't necessarily going to give you access to these games! If that makes sense...

I don't think that Microsoft are thinking about leaving consoles behind but I think they are trying to change the notion of what a console is. Sony, with the Pro is doing something similar.

I agree that Microsoft are going to tie their OS's together as they have and that Xbox will become a windows gaming machine and move to iterative updates. Regular gamers expect to update their hardware every 4-5 years, less regular gamers not so much depending on trends and popularity. So why release a brand new console and hope it catches when you can release iterative and better tie people into your app and game ecosystem. Less regular gamers still have working machines but they can always upgrade. New games will have modes and will eventually not work on older machines but old games will still be compatible in newer machines. It is a big incentive to stay with Microsoft if your games library will continue to work. I think the message of Scorpio will be, wow this new system is the dogs doodahs but fear not, your XB1 will last for a lot longer but when you are ready, upgrade. XB1 will be cheaper as well so sales will be steady and people get locked into Microsoft. I think they would be happy to keep the current install base for the XB1 and then add to it over time. It is a lot less risky then releasing a new console and it failing to connect to a user base.

The question is, will this prove to confusing to those consumers who like the simplicity of knowing I have console A, Console B is now available - I will upgrade as it is the new version for the next gen experience.

Interesting times to be a gamer!

I really don't see the Pro as being a 'change' to what the notion of a console is. In essence its not that dissimilar to the N64 with expansion pack. Its just a more powerful PS4 to offer a 'step' into the new technology - by that I mean 4k HDR TV's and VR. Its not offering anything 'new' or unique to the PS4 brand.

Scorpio though is bringing something New to the Xbox experience - something Xbox one owners can't experience - VR. It will have unique software and potentially access to extra/bonus content that XB1 owners won't. Think about the VR extras in CoD for example which can be offered to Scorpio but not XB1 gamers. Yes it could also be a bit like the Pro in that it offers an enhanced version of existing games but it will also offer new and unique experiences too. MS claim that ALL exclusives will be made to work on XB1 too but I doubt that in 3-4years, Games will be held up by the much inferior XB1 hardware.

Whether it will be confusing for gamers, time will tell. Most gamers are quite tech savvy and its those that buy 'gifts' for gamers that are most likely to be confused. I can see games on Xbox just being branded as Xbox games (not Xbox One or Xbox Scorpio) but with some disclaimer on the back saying something like Scorpio recommended to access ALL features or get the best experience.

Sony are likely to release a whole new generation of its console brand - most likely a PS5 and games will still have the relevant console branding. The difference is that during a 'crossover' phase, when both old and new consoles are simultaneously available, Games like CoD and Fifa will be released separately as PS4 and PS5 versions where as on Xbox, these will just be released as Xbox games. In theory it could be less confusing. If you then upgrade to the 'latest' Xbox, your entire library will stay with you, stay playable and in some cases look and play better too. If you upgrade to the latest PS though, you will have to start again with your games collection, rebuy the games for the new console (although I wouldn't be surprised if there is some transferable content like we saw with the start of this generation).

With MS's model, its possible that some confusion could take place but no more than with the existing model. I think its far less confusing than PC gaming as you have to know what CPU/GPU and RAM you have, how it compares to others to assess whether or not you meet the minimum/recommended specs.

If you get confused by buying games now, not know whether you have a PS4 or PS3, not know whether you have a Xbox One or Xbox 360, then the future will get confusing. Gamers have always known that the 'next' console will be an upgrade on their existing console. It may not offer much more than a visual make-over on most releases at the start but a lot often wait until there is a big enough library to make the leap to the next generation. They can't justify paying a premium to play 1-2 games. With Scorpio though, you could upgrade and instantly have a big library to play and some of those at enhanced levels. It could also offer a few 'new' exclusives (like VR based games) too. I can't see MS's progression being too confusing. Its inevitable at some point the Xbox One will not be powerful enough to meet the minimum specs required - much like we see with GPU/CPU's in PC's. Whether we start to see games hit this point during the Scorpio's run or whether its upgrade see's that point arrive, point is, it will happen but the Xbox One games will be playable on any future Xbox. Games will simply be marked as 'minimum required' but with Playstation, each new generation will also see games released in 'dual' format - like PS3 and PS4 versions.

Rightly or wrongly, MS sees its gaming division as a single brand moving forward. The Xbox brand is no longer just a 'console' but also their PC gaming brand. Its merging the two into one seemless experience so it doesn't matter if you play on a win10PC or Xbox console, the community, the games, the experience is the same (or at least similar but can differ with presentation and frame rates depending on hardware. Consoles are optimised for gaming so punch above their weight comparatively for their specs. So whilst consoles are 'fixed' in terms of specs, it can still be united with PC's in one 'xbox' community. The XB1 may end up being the low spec compared to the Scorpio and most PC's but its not that different from a low spec PC gaming playing with a friend on a high end gaming rig. MS are just trying to unite all these gamers together in one big 'Xbox' community. Whether it ends up working out, time will tell. It means that if you opt to buy the next Xbox or decide to jump into PC gaming, your Xbox profile/achievement score etc, games and friends will still come with you - unless your friends decide to go to Playstation of course.

Sony's PS4 Pro was born out of circumstance and technological 'need'. Sony are unlikely to replace their PS4 until at least the 5year mark and so with 4k TV's becoming more and more popular as well as VR, it was deemed that the Pro was needed to keep up with technology. If the PS5 has the power to keep up with technology after a year or two of release, I can understand why we may see a PS5 Pro. Why upgrade a console mid-term if it still delivering the level of performance to match the devices its connected to? 8k may well be available during the PS5's life but whether or not games are made to that standard who knows. Its clear that the Pro offers a noticeable improvement on visuals - particularly to those of us with 4k TV's so it was a 'worthwhile' upgrade to see us through the last years of the PS4 era before the PS5 is released rather than release a PS5 within 4-5years of the release of the PS4. I am sure Sony considered this but opted to go this route rather than upset its fanbase.

@BAMozzy: I agree on some points but I do think that the PS4 Pro marks a change in the direction of the console. We have had slim versions and model changes but those have really just been cosmetic. The PS4 Pro is an iterative update to its console - maybe not as mind blowing as a generational leap but I can't think of other iterative console updates in the past. I think that is why there has been a difficult marketing balancing act. Ultimately the majority of users will not upgrade to the Pro but at the same time I can see why Sony needed something a bit more powerful in the market to keep users engaged. It is still a change to the way consoles are normally released.

I also think that the majority of consumers are easily confused by versions etc. I mean, people on the site here are fans and there are millions of fans but a vast majority are either not regular gamers or not regular purchasers of games. I've received presents from relatives and friends for the wrong console (heck, this year I got xbox vouchers instead of PSN vouchers from my Dad because he remembered, at some point, I owned an xbox). Manufacturers obviously need to be relevant to gamer hobbyists (I hate the hardcore, casual gamer terms so trying to think of something not patronizing) but a console needs to move outside this group to sell gangbusters like the Xbox1 and PS4 have done. I have several friends and relatives that have a PS4 (or XB1) who have bought maybe 1-4 titles a year and typically the big name games. Those people bought when the prices went down and game maybe once a week or so. We are at that stage in the lifecycle when those people are the ones really buying consoles. Iterative consoles are a harder marketing sell - it is a mindset change. Once people get used to it then great, but you need to sell the concept and that is tough. It is why Sony has been cautious with the Pro. I am intrigued to see how MS market the Scorpio to the mass market.

@Rudy_Manchego: Whilst the Pro maybe a 'New' step for Sony and something we haven't really seen in recent generations of home Consoles, its not a new concept at all. The last home console I can think of was the N64 that offered upgradeability - not just the Expansion Pack but also had a 64DD (disk drive) expansion that turned the Nintendo 64 console into an Internet appliance, a multimedia workstation, and an expanded gaming platform - although only ever released in Japan (I think) and came too late for the rest of the world. In the past though, Consoles tended to last 4-5years before being superceded by the 'next' big thing and even then, there was some upgradeability to these. Sony didn't build the PS4 (or any of its consoles) to be upgradeable but the Pro in essence isn't that dissimilar from an upgraded N64.

The technology that all these Consoles have been connected to hasn't radically changed over the years. The biggest change was the step up from SD CRT TV's to HD Flat Screens. Both Sony and MS tough had consoles built for HD - the XB360 and PS3. If the PS3 was still 2-3years away, maybe Sony would have released a PS2 Pro to deliver HD graphics but it worked out that the arrival of HD also coincided with the arrival of this generation of console too. This generation though, less than a year after release, 4K became commercially available and this generation isn't consistently hitting even 1080p. Several years in, we have HDR and VR now too and all this makes the current generation feel more dated more inadequate. If the PS3 wasn't due out, playing a PS2 on a much bigger 1080p screen would look much rougher than on a small CRT TV and make it seem more inadequate and dated too.

The fact that all this new technology is gaining a bigger foothold in the homes of gamers, a long with the drop in prices of hardware parts (last years high-end $1k TitanX is beaten by this years mid range $400 GTX1070), meant that Sony could build a 'Pro' and sell it for the same price as at PS4 launch to bridge the gap between the HD and 4k Era we are entering. Its not like games haven't been built in 4k so expecting developers to do more specifically - I know they may end up doing a 'bit' more but its not like they are suddenly expected to start making games in 4k. All it means is that developers don't have to scale back their games as much for Pro as they do for PS4 and of course XB1. Its the fact that Sony are stuck in the HD era with no plans to replace the PS4 this early that they decided to build an upgraded PS4 for the market. Unless we jump into the 8k era during the PS5 era, I doubt we will see a Pro version (unless in response to the competition - like if MS brings out a much more powerful Scorpio 2 a few years into PS5's life). Even if we do jump into 8k, whether developers are making 8k games and hardware to run them is cheap enough to warrant making a Pro, time will tell.

The reason we have this iterative hardware from Sony is more circumstantial. They couldn't build a console for the next era at the price they wanted to sell 3yrs ago and now that era is upon us, they can but its still too soon to bring out their next gen hardware so they had to build a Pro.

I really don't think many gamers are 'confused' and like I said, the majority of those that are likely to be confused are those non-gamers who buy gaming products for their gaming friends/family. Mothers that buy PS3 games for their PS4 owning kids, Parents that buy Xbox credit for their PSN owning children etc. How many gamers do you know that bought Xbox Live instead of PS+ for themselves? How many gamers bought an Xbox or PS3 game instead of PS4 by mistake? If MS plans come to fruition, at least as I see them, even if you don't own a Scorpio, chances are you can buy an Xbox game and it will work on both. I expect VR to be clearly labelled and IF Scorpio is (or does become) the only console a game will run on, I expect that to clearly marked on the box. On the back it may say something like Scorpio required to access all content (for example some VR extra) or for the best experience, Scorpio recommended but the game will still work to a degree on XB1 and most Xbox owners will be aware that Scorpio is out. Problems and confusion is always going to happen with non-gamers and buying for gamers but I don't expect that most gamers will 'struggle'.

Consoles are far less confusing than they were - can this game work on a standard Sega Megadrive? Do I need the CD the 32x expansion? Will this game run on my N64, do I need the expansion pack to play it? Will this game work well on my 3DS XL or do I need to buy a new 3DS XL? Like I said, iterative and upgraded hardware isn't new but I can see why gamers who maybe haven't been gaming for very long may find iterative or upgradeable hardware a struggle. For those of us who lived through the birth of home gaming (inc console and home PC's), its nothing new at all. My Vic 20 for example had an expansion slot (which also doubled up as a cartridge slot for games - I had choplifter this way LOL). Most consoles in the 80's weren't 'static' and those that were, didn't last 5+years before being replaced by something else. Its not just Consoles though, almost all Home entertainment technology is upgraded - whether you choose to upgrade or not. HD TV's were upgraded to add smart TV, 3D and got thinner and thinner too and then replaced by 4k and HDR. Plasmas gave way to OLED's and QLED's are not too far off from hitting the market place (next years Samsungs are not 'true' QLEDs in that they don't emit their own light like OLEDs) . DVD's were replaced by Blurays, which are now upgraded to include 4k and HDR which also means upgrades to the hardware to play them. We have seen Audio expand from Stereo, to 5.1 Surround Sound, 7.1 and now Dolby Atmos. Every year we see a 'jump' in what PC's can utilise - last years best, the TitanX is now beaten by the GTX1070 - not quite the lowest GPU in Intels new desktop range. Every year we see new mobiles, tablets etc that are more powerful than a PS3 and in some cases, almost as powerful as an Xbox One/PS4 - in something that size and that thin! Point I am making is that most people are more than familiar with upgraded tech being released often - whether they buy frequently or not, I bet almost everyone has upgraded technology in their life for one reason or another. I know that some are less likely to upgrade than others on certain equipment - preferring to wait until its 'necessary' because of need or circumstance. In some ways, MS's model may be simpler as you just buy 'Xbox' branded products and they work regardless of what console you have. You don't have to worry if the game or peripheral will work on your (or your friends/kids/family member) console where as with Sony, you may not know they upgraded to the PS5 or still have a PS4 (although PSN credit won't matter) and maybe even 'some' peripherals might not work properly on their system like a DS4 on a PS5 or DS5 on a PS4 for example. In theory, if it says Xbox on it, it will work on any 'current' and theoretically 'future' console. It may not work on 'old' devices and the XB1 isn't going to remain 'current' forever.

I am not going to use the 'casual' or 'hardcore' terminology either. Like I said though, confusion isn't likely to affect many gamers at all. Its most likely to affect the friends and family of gamers but nothing is really changing. Its not like we are suddenly getting a 'new' brand to through into the mix. Its not like they need to worry whether its a PS4 or PS4 Pro you own as any PS4 game will work on both, they don't need to know if you own a XB1 or Scorpio as any Xbox game will work on both. Of course VR adds another level of confusion as to whether or not you have the peripheral but you yourself and probably every gamer knows what console they have and what games work on it and moving forward, I don't expect that to change.

So now that I have decided to wait on Switch, next on my list is Scorpio and see what that brings to the table. Hopefully they will have some info on it here shortly, or at the very least E3.

Scorpio is a pre order for me, I got the One day one and Scorpio will be no different.

I'm jelly.

@Splat: What's there to be jealous about its just a Diablo clone, don't you have Diablo III on PS4? Besides it's on PC right now.

I wonder if Force Unleashed comes with the DLC. I played and finished it years ago on the Wii, which I loved. The Wii motion controls were really fun to use especially when playing Vader. I will admit the motion controls and the Wii version already having the DLC included was why I went with that version. Still for free I wouldn't mind playing it again.

I have zero interest in that Lovers game, it looked like a game from the '80s but the other 3 look decent. I have Star Wars on disc so I can get rid of another one now. I'm trying to retire my 360 and just have the One and it is going quite well with the BC games.

Not too shabby - I will probably download Project Cars - just because I can but I do get bored of racing games. I already own Star Wars on the 360 but will probably add it to my download queue for the XB1. Not interested at all in the other 2...

@KratosMD EVOLVE! i doubt even giving that away will help it

Kinda odd making Borderlands 2 backwards compatible since they have The Handsome Collection on Xbox one.

@Tasuki Not really as that is also 'free' to all Xbox360 owners too. Maybe some won't have the Handsome collection and maybe it might tempt them to buy. I doubt I will download it because I own the collection. Its still a great game and for all those undecided on Borderlands, its a great opportunity to try it. Its not like the game is linear or only 1 character so if they enjoy playing it one way on the free version, they may decide to buy the collection and play through the game as a different character and all the DLC and the other game too...

@FullbringIchigo Maybe, maybe not but its the 'Ultimate Edition'. Visually the game looked great but it was all the BS DLC - especially all the day 1 extras that ultimately ruined it, not the game-play and this comes with a lot of that. It may actually resurrect it on XB1 at least. Its still not bad value for 'Free'. I will actually download it but whether I get to play it much with Horizon and Mass Effect out this month...

Layers of Fear looks interesting for free too - not something I would normally buy but will download. Not interested in