Battlegrounds poor performance on the Xbox One X

After looking at the specs for the Xbox One X, I would be very surprised if they somehow got this game performing at a half decent rate, being that Xbox One X's CPU (PS4 Pro included) is comparable to an I-3 processor. I highly doubt
that's going to cut it. I feel sorry for the console fan base. They will never get a CPU intensive game that plays well all because Microsoft wanted to be cheapskates. I mean, as a former console player, it kind of pisses me off. If they knew they wanted more
PC games, then they should have designed the damn thing accordingly from the get go. Just put one of the higher end I-5 processors in it and they would have been all set. So I would really like to know, would you all as console gamer's be willing to spend
another 100-200 dollars on a new Xbox if it meant you get to play the latest CPU intensive games unmolested? What are you willing to spend on a console? If I was still playing on the console, I sure as hell would spend $700 up front if it means it gives a
better performance with CPU intensive games like Battlegrounds.

:)

 

TV Picutre/Audio stutters

support.xbox.com/.../poor-video-performance

 

Please Help: Flicking Screen and Audio While "Watching TV"

support.xbox.com/.../poor-video-performance

Try the solutions on that page, let us know how it goes.

 

I think that the game being in preview, and being a lesser form of the pc version is a big part of the problem, rather than the console itself. And as it progresses it will get better, and of course updates that will regularly rolling out in the next few
months. I don't understand why people are so fast to jump on the game, producing and developing a game takes effort and time.

I fully believe the game is just on the corner of becoming something amazing.

 

We shall see, but I really don't see that happening with the CPU Microsoft decided to go with. They put all of their money and attention into building a console to make a game look pretty, while totally neglecting the meat and potatoes
of it all. They gave the CPU no attention knowing full well that more PC games were clearly their target, that are CPU intensive. The only way I see this working is if they can take some of the workload off of the CPU and put it on the GPU, but I'm no PC geek,
so I can't say for sure if that's achievable. For the sake of argument though, would you be willing to spend say $700 up front on a console if it means you get a better long term product?