It’ll be the cheapest place, by an absurd margin, to play Baldur’s Gate 3.

    • stopthatgirl7@kbin.socialOP
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      13
      ·
      1 year ago

      Microsoft did the right thing by softening their stance on system parity. Insisting on it would have hurt the Xbox further along the line, but now devs know they can still release on Xbox if they can’t get one or two features to run on the S.

      • Facebones@reddthat.com
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        5
        ·
        1 year ago

        I didn’t know it wasn’t on Xbox, that’s GOTTA be hurtin em. I’m sure they’ll learn from this and make whatever exceptions need to be made far earlier next time.

        • lemmyvore
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          3
          ·
          1 year ago

          If I’m not mistaken the only reason it’s not already on Xbox is because Microsoft insisted it needs to have shared screen on all models, which proved to be problematic and eventually impossible on S, but they refused to release it on X in the meantime.

          Basically it’s very much Microsoft’s own doing.

      • VentraSqwal@links.dartboard.social
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        5
        ·
        1 year ago

        It’s already been hurting them a lot it sounds like. I don’t think Baldur’s Gate is the first game to not release on Xbox because they couldn’t achieve system parity with the S. If they’ve really softened on it, then that’s a good idea. Better late than never.

    • BlackSpasmodic@lemmy.dbzer0.com
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      3
      ·
      1 year ago

      Yeah feature parity made sense in the beginning so the S didn’t get left behind but at this point its place feels secure to me. It’s the cheap option. I think most gamers understand that and accept the trade-offs that are inherent in that choice.