Rumor: Leaked document detailing MS future plans for the Xbox line. 56 pages long.

I complained about latency because - guess what? - I have used onlive.
I also complained about image quality. Because streaming video has both a worse resolution and a higher latency than playing a game directly.

As for 'not having to stream' PC games, I have no idea what you are talking about. You're streaming games to your Xbox from a remote server, and from there to yuor PC - how does that equal not having to stream a PC game, or not being any different in terms of hops to onlive?
No doubt there is a latency difference, but if you grab 30 people from the street and had them play on Gaikai vs a local XBOX I bet none of them would be able to tell the difference. And if you took 30 hardcore gamers, I bet a good portion if not all wouldn't be able to tell the difference either. And the tech is getting better everyday.

And I'm saying Starcraft 2 is installed on your XBOX 720. On your PC you could play it as you do if it were installed on your PC via "streaming." The only "hop" is from your living room, not from OnLive's servers...

How do you think Wii U works? This works the same way, except it's not streaming to the Wii U controller it's streaming to your PC (or any Windows 8 device).
 
And I'm saying Starcraft 2 is installed on your XBOX 720. On your PC you could play it as you do if it were installed on your PC via "streaming." The only "hop" is from your living room, not from OnLive's servers...
Right.

When you said it would make PC Gaming irrelevant, I assumed you were talking about actual online type services.

Apparently you just mean playing xbox games on a monitor is somehow going to interest people with gaming PCs.
 
This has to be an assignment for a marketing degree or something. It refers to it as the 720.... what is this, 2009?
Considering this document is supposedly two years old, it does fit into the time frame... though still very skeptical.. I am a bit surprised that the document was requested to be removed by Covington & Burling LLP. They are known to represent Microsoft. So as of now I still consider it a "rumor", I find it hard to believe that Microsoft would have a huge law firm take the time to request it be taking down if there was not at least some items that were legit.
 
Considering this document is supposedly two years old, it does fit into the time frame... though still very skeptical.. I am a bit surprised that the document was requested to be removed by Covington & Burling LLP. They are known to represent Microsoft. So as of now I still consider it a "rumor", I find it hard to believe that Microsoft would have a huge law firm take the time to request it be taking down if there was not at least some items that were legit.
this is a document they are saying is from MS, I can totally see MS taking this down no matter what it said, real or fake, website will report this as a internal MS document.
 
No doubt there is a latency difference, but if you grab 30 people from the street and had them play on Gaikai vs a local XBOX I bet none of them would be able to tell the difference. And if you took 30 hardcore gamers, I bet a good portion if not all wouldn't be able to tell the difference either. And the tech is getting better everyday.

And I'm saying Starcraft 2 is installed on your XBOX 720. On your PC you could play it as you do if it were installed on your PC via "streaming." The only "hop" is from your living room, not from OnLive's servers...

How do you think Wii U works? This works the same way, except it's not streaming to the Wii U controller it's streaming to your PC (or any Windows 8 device).
This just sounds even more confusing for the consumer.
 

Plinko

Wildcard berths that can't beat teams without a winning record should have homefield advantage
So, if this was real, could one assume this was Microsoft's plan BEFORE they caved to Epic's demand for a more powerful system?

I mean, with the rumors about Durango and it's power, there's no way that thing drops for $299, is there?
 
So, if this was real, could one assume this was Microsoft's plan BEFORE they caved to Epic's demand for a more powerful system?
I don't think you can assume that. How do you know they caved to Epic ? It could be revealing that Epic begged for super powerful next gen systems and later come out and say the minimum for the full featured UE4 is only a 1 teraflops GPU.

Some insiders have hinted the 1-1.5 TF GPU is still the latest current spec for Durango.

Epic obviously have to tailor their engine to meet what the consoles can do since it's most of their market. It seems to me very likely that 1TF could be close to the spec of one of the next gen systems, maybe a bit below for some headroom.
 
The gap between Wii U and Xbox 3/PS4 will be smaller than the gap between PS360 and current high-end PCs.

Hmm..isn't that a given, since:

1) Wii U is more powerful than PS360, and...
2) Target Xbox 3/PS4 specs are equal or less than current High-end PCs.


Can you put it in perspective with a slightly different analogy?
 
I don't think you can assume that. How do you know they caved to Epic ? It could be revealing that Epic begged for super powerful next gen systems and later come out and say the minimum for the full featured UE4 is only a 1 teraflops GPU.

Some insiders have hinted the 1-1.5 TF GPU is still the latest current spec for Durango.

Epic obviously have to tailor their engine to meet what the consoles can do since it's most of their market. It seems to me very likely that 1TF could be close to the spec of one of the next gen systems, maybe a bit below for some headroom.
1TFLOP actually isn't the minimum for the full featured UE4. Just a DX11-level GPU.
 
I still think this is fake. We don't even know if Microsoft requested the removal, it's possible Covington & Burling just did it as a preemptive measure. A document purporting to be 'confidential' material is grounds enough to remove it anyway.
 
1TFLOP actually isn't the minimum for the full featured UE4. Just a DX11-level GPU.
You're right. They said it starts to "get interesting" at 1TF.


If it is close to PS3/X360 but has DX11 feature set, do you think Wii-U could handle UE4 games with the full lighting effects and everything but just with a diminished resolution ?
 
Hmm..isn't that a given, since:

1) Wii U is more powerful than PS360, and...
2) Target Xbox 3/PS4 specs are equal or less than current High-end PCs.


Can you put it in perspective with a slightly different analogy?
I've seen too many posts to know people are taking it as a given.

A rough power analogy I've used is that next gen would be comparable to last gen where Wii U = PS2, PS4 = GC, Xbox 3 = Xbox. But until I know more details about Xbox 3, I'm not completely sold on saying it's more powerful than PS4. Just more memory.

You're right. They said it starts to "get interesting" at 1TF.


If it is close to PS3/X360 but has DX11 feature set, do you think Wii-U could handle UE4 games with the full lighting effects and everything but just with a diminished resolution ?
I blame Nirolak for using a misleading thread title for the UE4 requirements. >_>

I would believe both reduced resolution and cutting back on some other effects due to a lack of raw power. But it should still be able to run the game. If the GPGPU rumor about Wii U is true then that means all three consoles will be utilizing GPUs that have an emphasis on compute capabilities.
 

onQ123

Junior Member
I've seen too many posts to know people are taking it as a given.

A rough power analogy I've used is that next gen would be comparable to last gen where Wii U = PS2, PS4 = GC, Xbox 3 = Xbox. But until I know more details about Xbox 3, I'm not completely sold on saying it's more powerful than PS4. Just more memory.



I blame Nirolak for using a misleading thread title for the UE4 requirements. >_>

I would believe both reduced resolution and cutting back on some other effects due to a lack of raw power. But it should still be able to run the game. If the GPGPU rumor about Wii U is true then that means all three consoles will be utilizing GPUs that have an emphasis on compute capabilities.
from the rumored specs I'm seeing it's more

Wii U = N64

Xbox 3 = PS2

PS4 = Xbox

besides the ram part
 

teh_pwn

"Saturated fat causes heart disease as much as Brawndo is what plants crave."
Hmm..isn't that a given, since:

1) Wii U is more powerful than PS360, and...
2) Target Xbox 3/PS4 specs are equal or less than current High-end PCs.


Can you put it in perspective with a slightly different analogy?
Less than. A single one of my 2 GPUs from 2011 match the rumored specs. High end PCs today would use 1-2 GTX 670s.
 

teh_pwn

"Saturated fat causes heart disease as much as Brawndo is what plants crave."
Crytek just said a few days ago that they are "way beyond next-gen consoles already" and implied a negativ outlook for the next gen consoles:




Makes sense now.
Keep in mind Crytek was 1-2 years beyond PCs when Crysis came out.

Their demos of Crytek 3 look something that would cripple a high end PC, save for GTX 670 SLI or AMD 7970 CF.
 

onQ123

Junior Member
LOLOLOLOL. No.

I like what Sony seems to be doing, but that's way too lopsided.
if Wii U is just above Xbox 360 / PS3 that place it where N64 was over the PS1 & Sega Saturn,


& if Xbox Next is going for 4 - 6X Xbox 360 & PS4 is going for 10X PS3 it's closer to what I said than what you said there is noway that 10X PS3 is lower than 4 -6X Xbox 360 for games or 8X Xbox 360 total power.
 
if Wii U is just about Xbox 360 / PS3 that place it where N64 was over the PS1 & Sega Saturn,


& if Xbox Next is going for 4 - 6X Xbox 360 & PS4 is going for 10X PS3 it's closer to what I said than what you said there is noway that 10X PS3 is lower than 4 -6X Xbox 360 for games or 8X Xbox 360 total power.
I'd rather judge the gap by actual specs than multipliers and poor comparisons.
 

onQ123

Junior Member
I'd rather judge the gap by actual specs than multipliers and poor comparisons.
even then it's said that the Xbox 3 GPU is 1 - 1.5 TFLOP vs PS4 1.8 TFLOP so unless the Xbox 3 CPU is way more powerful than the PS4 & can help a lot with the graphics like the Cell did with the PS3 I'm not sure how it's better to call the PS4 the Gamecube vs the Xbox.
 
even then it's said that the Xbox 3 GPU is 1 - 1.5 TFLOP vs PS4 1.8 TFLOP so unless the Xbox 3 CPU is way more powerful than the PS4 & can help a lot with the graphics like the Cell did with the PS3 I'm not sure how it's better to call the PS4 the Gamecube vs the Xbox.
And I said I wasn't completely sold on saying Xbox 3 is more powerful right?
 

onQ123

Junior Member
And I said I wasn't completely sold on saying Xbox 3 is more powerful right?
I guess it's to crazy to call right now because it's not known how much of the power will be used for the OS

but honestly I think Sony & MS have a trick up their sleeves with the consoles being released as just starting points with newer models that will come out that add to the power of the systems & play the same games but better, using the PC\Apple iOS model.
 
A rough power analogy I've used is that next gen would be comparable to last gen where Wii U = PS2, PS4 = GC, Xbox 3 = Xbox. But until I know more details about Xbox 3, I'm not completely sold on saying it's more powerful than PS4. Just more memory.

FWIW, I saw one developer say the difference between Wii-U and PS4/Durango will be larger than the difference between Dreamcast and Xbox.
 
I guess it's to crazy to call right now because it's not known how much of the power will be used for the OS

but honestly I think Sony & MS have a trick up their sleeves with the consoles being released as just starting points with newer models that will come out that add to the power of the systems & play the same games but better, using the PC\Apple iOS model.
Most definitely. MS is going to have to figure out how they can take their rumored direction and apply it to markets beyond the US. The console may have a lot going for it, but how will European gamers benefit from that? And of course Japan doesn't even care.
 

onQ123

Junior Member
Most definitely. MS is going to have to figure out how they can take their rumored direction and apply it to markets beyond the US. The console may have a lot going for it, but how will European gamers benefit from that? And of course Japan doesn't even care.

Sneak it into Japan as a Small PC or even a TV using the SOC.
 
^ LOL. I'm interested in how they will handle Xbox 3 and Japan.

FWIW, I saw one developer say the difference between Wii-U and PS4/Durango will be larger than the difference between Dreamcast and Xbox.
He said that using my analogy. And based on what I've seen I'm sure it's the same as what he is referring to and so far I disagree with him.
 
For as long as this generation has gone on, all three of these consoles should be way more powerful...typically they should be more powerful than the PC's that are current when they release, at least for about 2-3 months...

isn't that usually how it was?
 
For as long as this generation has gone on, all three of these consoles should be way more powerful...typically they should be more powerful than the PC's that are current when they release, at least for about 2-3 months...

isn't that usually how it was?
I think that has been debatable. With how next gen is shaping up it won't be. The TDP and cost (debatable) increase that went along with the power increase of GPUs have exceeded what's feasible in the console market.
 

Raistlin

Post Count: 9999
On a side note ... great job with this Jeff! The MS ninjas were definitely working overtime :D




I'd be really surprised if MS can get content deals that Sony can't, given Sony (albeit in a different division) actually produce content in the first place.
But they already have this gen. That's what's so ridiculous.




They have one very big feather to offer the studios.... roughly twice as many potential customers as sony in the US (assuming it would be a US focused service). The xbox audience is also used to paying for access to things so it would fit in there as well. Making a guess here but I would assume there are about 10-15 million users paying for gold in the US. That would put them in the top5 largest cable companies in the US (and if its closer to 15 #2 behind only comcast). That's not a direct correlation but it's something they can sell to the studios.
Yep. Not to mention they have the infrastructure (Xbox Live), and other products (OS integration) to offer it to an even wider audience with non-console products
I still don't understand why sony has yet to really leverage sony pictures on the ps3.... they really could do something gamechanging there.
How long did it take for Crackle to show up on PS3? This just speaks to what I brought up before. Sony had a head start for this sort of thing (both in timing and actual owned IP), and has completely shitted it away with ineptness. MS has already surpassed them on this front, and looks to dramatically step it up next gen.





It's pretty obviously real. But it's also 2 years old, so its not really indicative of anything other than what MS was thinking in the very earliest planning stages.
In terms of details that's true (timing, specs, etc) ... but unless there was some sort of dramatic change in course, there's a ton of high level info in here that shows the direction they are going with a variety of products. More importantly, some of these services and products actually have recently materialized. And given that the big picture presented here makes all of these items quite interrelated, it gives a ton of credence to the other services and features presented - at least from a high level. Obviously the details have likely changed.





For the new page:

DigitalFoundry claim that this is completely fake:DF Tweet,DF Tweet2,DF Tweet3
Repeating it on a new page doesn't make it right :D

The rationale in some of these doesn't even make sense. Why would a 2 year old document mention durango to begin with? The name likely wouldn't have existed back then ... and they certainly wouldn't have made specific HW decisions at this point. Overall architecture yes, detailed HW specs involving components, etc. ... no.





*Puts on conspiracy hat*

MS leaked this so that Sony would think they are releasing a cheap/underpowered system at a profit, to get them to do the same. Then BAM, 20 gigs up in this bitch with a 6 core CPU, and 2x 6970s duck taped together.
Unless they are planning on releasing a very expensive system, what can be garnered from this is the general direction. And that direction is to have some very serious non-gaming capabilities. That doesn't mean gaming will be crippled by any means, but it shows it's not the only priority.

There's basically no way they're going to go with an architecture that puts gaming first if it gimps the non-gaming functions.





Did the doc mention Durango? If it didn't, I'm calling fake.
It's an internal doc that's close to 2 years old





Another tip off: they refer to the "7th generation" of consoles. Only forum dwellers do this.
No. Where you don't see it is in marketing meant for public consumption. That doesn't mean people on the inside don't do it. This is an internal document, not meant for release.





Kotaku first made the codename "Durango" public on Feb. 15. But some guy wrote last Nov. on pastebin some xbox 3 and PS4 specs and already got "Durango" (and "Orbis") right.

But we have no idea how long MS is running with that name internally.
Your premise is right, but your conclusion is suspect. We don't know how long they've been running with durango, so why should we automatically assume they had to have came up with it a year + earlier ... and view that as proof this info is fake?

That's terrible reasoning.





It would be weird to expect Microsoft to settle for a GPU below Sony's projected one. Their architecture -that of Microsoft machines- has always been GPU centric...
Priorities change.

As a serious gamer, this could prove unfortunate ... but I understand the direction they are going.





Considering this document is supposedly two years old, it does fit into the time frame... though still very skeptical.. I am a bit surprised that the document was requested to be removed by Covington & Burling LLP. They are known to represent Microsoft. So as of now I still consider it a "rumor", I find it hard to believe that Microsoft would have a huge law firm take the time to request it be taking down if there was not at least some items that were legit.
I think what's interesting here is that it contains tid bits that have been separately stated over the last 6+ months from a variety of different sources ... and puts the puzzle pieces together into a full picture.

While that could still just mean it's essentially a summary of those rumors with the needed conclusion jumping, we really haven't seen something like this before ... and it obviously took a lot of effort to throw this together if it's a hoax.

If anything, I think it's a bigger stretch to assume it's fake than real.






What does it mean by "always on"?

I can still play games offline unlike Diablo 3, right?
This was something brought up quite a while back, and it's inconclusive what it means. Some where thinking it's DRM (that would suck) ... others (including me) have speculated this is more about the OS being always on in some lower power fashion. Either via a dedicated SoC or if using a large multi-core CPU, by turning off most of the cores.

The rationale would be like Roku, your DVR, and similar set-top boxes. It allows instant jump-in to get to media, facebook, the ability to record TV, etc. Given the direction this and tons of other statements and rumors have shown ... it seems like a logical move. There have been similar rumors for PS4 as well. The rationale of an APU + GPU or the numerous other rumors all point to this as a logical end.




So, if this was real, could one assume this was Microsoft's plan BEFORE they caved to Epic's demand for a more powerful system?

I mean, with the rumors about Durango and it's power, there's no way that thing drops for $299, is there?
I would suspect there's no backing away from the media/set-top box features they are planning. They are very entrenched in it, and recent announcements have shown they only plan to go full speed with it.

So the question becomes just how much silicon and money is available for direct gaming capabilities. An interesting idea (and the way he stated it ... it sounded to be more sourced rumor than speculation) was brought to light by Pachter on the E3, Day 0 Giant Bombcast. Due to the integrated DVR and IPTV functionality of this system, it's expected we will see subsidized systems from service providers. Basically how high-end cable/satellite set-top boxes/DVR's work. You pay some upfront subsidized fee ... and then pay monthly for it.

It doesn't seem coincidental that MS is actually doing a dry run of this same concept at their MS stores for 360. You can purchase a Kinect 360 for $99 along with a 2-year subscription to Xbox live. The subscription rate however is higher since you are paying off the subsidy. It's the same concept as your cable box 'rental' fee. If they feel this sort of pricing model is tenable, we could see them up the ante in terms of 'gaming specific' performance.
 

Raistlin

Post Count: 9999
For as long as this generation has gone on, all three of these consoles should be way more powerful...typically they should be more powerful than the PC's that are current when they release, at least for about 2-3 months...

isn't that usually how it was?
Not necessarily in terms of raw performance, but due to the fixed nature and lower level API's ... usually one or more console has been able to outperform typical PC peers of the time in many respects (though resolution has basically always been in favor of PC's).

However, that premise was based on consoles being very game-oriented in terms of architecture (and therefore performance), as well as explicitly targeting serious gamers. As things have evolved and continue to evolve, neither of those points can be assumed.
 
In terms of details that's true (timing, specs, etc) ... but unless there was some sort of dramatic change in course, there's a ton of high level info in here that shows the direction they are going with a variety of products. More importantly, some of these services and products actually have recently materialized. And given that the big picture presented here makes all of these items quite interrelated, it gives a ton of credence to the other services and features presented - at least from a high level. Obviously the details have likely changed.
Yes, like Xbox 361, "New Haptic controller", "New Live Tiers" and other features the documents claims are planned for 2012. Unless we learn about them on Monday.

Regardless, the general direction the document outlines is the one I'd expect them to take.
 
I will just leave this out here in the open..

Sometimes MS has leaks, sometimes MS has "planned" leaks to get feedback.

This doc was made in a way, that it can easily be argued as being fake but that does not mean that some of the facts in it, is fake.

Ok, I'm still not saying that this is the real deal, because I'm not sure either, but I do know that some of MS leaks (surprisingly many), are "planned" leaks.
 
Laughing at everyone who thought this was fake. GAF is way too quick to judge sometimes. Knew this was real the second I saw it, soley based on it matching up with older internal documents from previous gens that got out.

MS will only take something down if it has classified info, old or not.
 
I will just leave this out here in the open..

Sometimes MS has leaks, sometimes MS has "planned" leaks to get feedback.

This doc was made in a way, that it can easily be argued as being fake but that does not mean that some of the facts in it, is fake.

Ok, I'm still not saying that this is the real deal, because I'm not sure either, but I do know that some of MS leaks (surprisingly many), are "planned" leaks.

It seems like MS would be disadvantaged if this info got out. Unless the whole thing was just disinformation.

If it's real, it telegraphs many details on their future business plans to competitors. Which is why I think they got that law firm to yank it.

If it is real, it may have been leaked by some disgruntled employee.
 

Raistlin

Post Count: 9999
It seems like MS would be disadvantaged if this info got out. Unless the whole thing was just disinformation.

If it's real, it telegraphs many details on their future business plans to competitors. Which is why I think they got that law firm to yank it.

If it is real, it may have been leaked by some disgruntled employee.
While it is somewhat damaging, in many respects I can't imagine it's all that severe. Some of the points have been long rumored/leaked, some of the points have been telegraphed, and some have already been announced of late.

Certainly it will be seen as some level of confirmation if demonstrated to be real, but I can't imagine the competition wasn't aware of many of the aspects here. At this point it's a bit late for them to dramatically change course. So either they're ready to compete or they're not.

It would be one thing if this had leaked anywhere near its origin ... at this point though, it's a bit late.
 

Black_Stride

do not tempt fate do not contrain Wonder Woman's thighs do not do not
Their demos of Crytek 3 look something that would cripple a high end PC, save for GTX 670 SLI or AMD 7970 CF.
Hahaha.
Ive got CE3.4 (what they demoed) on my machine right now.
Runs perfectly im pulling somewhere in 64 - 80fps range.
That includes all the DX11 effects, even when i pull in a bunch of lights or rain on the ocean my PC manages to hold a decent frame rate(lowest is maybe 54fps)

You vastly underestimate how much better optimized CE3.4 is compared to the stock CE3.

Note. Ive got a 2500K and GTX570.
 
from the rumored specs I'm seeing it's more

Wii U = N64

Xbox 3 = PS2

PS4 = Xbox

besides the ram part
.....I can't believe there are people that have such views.

I'm leaning on the PS2/GC/Xbox range in terms of performance based on rumored/known specs. Of course, with a focus on modern features and whatnot, which all three will have.

On another note, don't compare GPUs directly through FLOP rating. 600 GFLOPs vs 1800 GFLOPs =/= 3x performance. This is why on the PC front, you don't see people comparing GPUs via FLOP ratings. We do it through actual benchmarks.

An example of this would be an nvidia GeForce 8800/9800GT vs ATI Radeon HD4850, where the 4850 has 2x the FLOP rating of a 8800GT (~1000 GFLOPs vs ~500 GFLOPs) but it's nowhere near 2x as powerful as a 8800GT. They actually perform extremely similarly and in some cases, the 8800GT beats the 4850. Of course, this can be due to terribly bad drivers among other reasons, but in a console space, one can safely assume that there won't be any driver issues.

Check this tech-review for a more in-depth summary (through actual numbers): http://techreport.com/articles.x/18682/5

Basing performance purely on FLOP rating, a GTX480 should be only 1.2x as powerful as a 4850. Lol. Also, note GTX480 vs Radeon 5870.

I'm not saying I expect power to be generally the same among all three consoles, no. I fully expect PS4/Xbox3 to be more powerful than Wii U (for reasons more than just speculated/rumored specs). All I'm saying is that those who expect extremely drastic differences will be disappointed. It will not be a Wii vs PS360 case (it can't).

I also realize that we don't have much else aside from FLOP ratings of the GPUs to go on, so it's understandable that people will resort to comparing them directly via FLOP ratings. I'm sure BG knows this, as well. Just trying to make a point to those that are less-informed.

Oh yeah, there's also more to a console than just the GPU :)
 
Hey guys.

Tom Warren here (Senior Editor at The Verge). I posted this story at The Verge yesterday. I just wanted to clear up a few things and address some points I've seen posted elsewhere etc. The Xbox 720 leak was covered by The Verge at The Verge, not Polygon at The Verge. I know the temporary home can be confusing at times, but thought it was important to point that out.

As for how we check these types of stories. I have been reporting on Microsoft for around 12 years now. That's not to say I know everything about Microsoft and its processes, but I have a fairly good idea of what is and isn't an internal doc usually after the first few pages. This document in question is from August 2010, prior to iOS 4.2 (mentioned in the PPT notes) and when certain team members (mentioned in doc notes) were still at the company in engineering roles. The document references several employees by name and uses one of Microsoft's internal "CSG_Pres" PowerPoint templates (an early example of their Metro style PowerPoint templates that are used regularly internally now).

Couple this with the fact it aligns with other information I've seen about Nextbox over the past year, it aligned perfectly. The document also references Microsoft's SmartGlass technology (announced at E3). I went through a number of other ways to verify the information was as accurate as other stories we would report on - I'm not going to outline the exact processes because I like to keep those secret :)

We make every attempt to ensure this type of data is accurate. I ran a number of stories ahead of this year's E3, and they were all accurate:

Microsoft to bring full Internet Explorer browsing to Xbox 360 with Kinect controls
Exclusive: Kinect Play Fit to offer universal exercise tracking with 'Joule' heart rate monitor
Exclusive: $99 Xbox 360 + Kinect bundle launching next week with two-year subscription
Exclusive: Microsoft to preview 'Woodstock' Xbox music service at E3

Hopefully this clears up any questions over how we vet this type of information. I don't typically report on Xbox or gaming news (its not my core knowledge) but I do enjoy reading Neogaf threads from time to time. You guys have an amazing community here so keep it up :)

Thanks,
Tom