Last week, I demonstrated the new Xbox PC app which ended up being uploaded prematurely to some users' devices (including mine, apparently!) but, some of you were asking how it works on an Xbox Ally. The answer is: pretty damn great.

The Xbox PC app has improved leaps and bounds over the past couple of years as Microsoft turned its attention more seriously to Windows and PC gaming in general. Steam OS has been giving Microsoft a well-deserved kick up the backside both in the usability and performance space for gaming, and the competition has led to improvements for those in the Xbox ecosystem on PC, both via Xbox Play Anywhere and Xbox / PC Game Pass.

The Xbox PC app is undergoing a big revamp later this year, and here's a video detailing a very early build you can expect to see (in a far more polished form) in the coming weeks.

DEAL: Get Surfshark VPN 86% OFF with Windows Central 🦈

The primary gain here is raw performance. The Xbox Ally paired with the Xbox PC app offers very middling navigational responsiveness, with this weird "rubber banding" quirk where the cursor gets stuck, and you have to wait for it to become unstuck for a couple of seconds. If you get frustrated and spam buttons, as I often do, the inputs will queue up and then all play out instantly, leading to the highlighted object flipping all over the place.

In the new Xbox PC app, the rubber banding is completely gone I'm happy to report, even on this early build. Navigating through even massive lists of games is smooth and pleasant, and the loading speed is vastly improved across every panel. Whether it's your own library, the Xbox Game Pass library, the store page, individual game pages, and beyond. Navigation also now feels a lot more "d-pad" native. On the existing app, sometimes the cursor moves in a diagonal direction unexpectedly, adding to the sense that it isn't truly native for console-style use.

RELATED: Hands-on unboxing with the new Xbox Ally X20

The new Xbox PC app doesn't offer much by way of new features yet, but I am told that there are plans to add new stuff before it all goes live. Indeed, this is an early, unfinished build as mentioned, and some of the things I saw people dislike from the video I put out last week have already been addressed on internal builds I'm told.

It's unclear exactly when this will ship. I'm expecting it to go out to Xbox Insiders on PC at least towards the end of the year, by which time it should be a lot more polished and refined over what I've been messing around with now. It's unclear if the Xbox Game Bar guide will get similar treatment, but I would hope so, since now it has a very different visual style to the Xbox PC app itself.

Xbox is getting serious about PC gaming

I would like to see more customization, with custom backgrounds to give us a greater sense of "ownership" in our increasingly-digital investment in the hobby. I'd like to see more data surface more quickly when navigating the store too. I shouldn't have to enter a store page to see screenshots of a game or try to figure out what it is from its thumbnail in my view. Also, I think Xbox could still improve the search tool a bit, although some of this is on the developer's side with regards to tagging their games properly and so on.

For sure, some of Xbox's issues on PC move beyond the app itself, and emerge on the developer ecosystem side. Tainted Grail: Fall of Avalon for example shipped with two builds simultaneously when it hit Xbox Play Anywhere a couple of weeks ago, allowing users to download the Xbox console version to their PC (which naturally wouldn't run). It's small issues like this which simply shouldn't be possible, and wouldn't be possible on Steam. Xbox needs to look towards fixing a litany of small things with its PC gaming ecosystem overall, and address things like native modding ecosystem support, systems for developer interactions with the community, social features potentially, and beyond. Perhaps the new Xbox Labs team will have some interesting things for Xbox PC up its sleeve in the future too.

In any case, it's great to see Microsoft double down on all of its endpoints. Xbox console has had a ton of new features lately, with Mythic Achievements, 1440p remote play streaming, and voice clipping in the Game DVR. Xbox Cloud Gaming is also getting a new interface that looks very close to the new PC app, and we should be seeing a new Xbox Elite Series 3 controller emerge soon.

Join us on Reddit at r/WindowsCentral to share your insights and discuss our latest news, reviews, and more.

It's no secret that Microsoft's gaming division has struggled to keep pace with PlayStation and Nintendo for active console users, and this Xbox survey suggests the firm might be considering the nuclear option to fix things.

Yesterday, a new survey appeared for a subset of Xbox users on the Insider Program, presumably among those who Microsoft tracks as having multiple devices. A user sent us the below survey screens, which Windows Central has verified as real.

Microsoft's problematic Xbox multiplatform strategy has left many users who own multiple devices with fewer reasons to actually turn their consoles on. In that universe, it reduces Microsoft's chances to earn users in it's own ecosystem considerably, impacting both first party revenue and third party port viability. Microsoft sells mountains of games on PlayStation, but it has to pay a 30% cut for the privilege. Many PlayStation users already own an Xbox too, so Microsoft is potentially handing away potential users for no real reason.

These new surveys suggest Microsoft may be considering some drastic moves to change the situation.

The survey asks a variety of questions of users across multiple ecosystems, asking how likely they would be to invest in the Xbox platform if various games went timed, or even fully console exclusive.

Microsoft asks if users would switch to Xbox on a per game basis, including pitches of exclusivity for games like Fallout, The Elder Scrolls, DOOM, Hideo Kojima's PHYSINT, Diablo, and even Minecraft itself. The survey even stresses that existing titles wouldn't be removed from other platforms, but would no longer receive new content.

There's even a nuclear option question, asking users how they'd change their habits if every single Xbox game (except Call of Duty, likely owing to acquisition requirements) went fully console exclusive.

It asks users to consider the hypothetical scenario, offering multiple choice responses below it.

"Imagine it was announced that all future title releases from every XBOX-developed gaming franchise except Call of Duty will be console-exclusive to XBOX," the final survey question reads. "For Minecraft only, existing titles would no longer be available for purchase on PlayStation or Nintendo consoles, and would not receive any new content updates. However, there is no impact to any of the existing titles or content you already own. Nothing changes on PC in this announcement."

It asks users if they would move to an existing Xbox console they already own, buy a new one, switch to PC, or skip it entirely in this scenario.

Going multiplatform didn't work, would going maximum exclusivity work instead?

In the near term, even if Microsoft did create massive desire for its platform and was somehow able to make even GTA6 magically exclusive, the RAMpocalypse has driven hardware sales to historic lows. Even if there was Xbox stock available globally, they've become prohibitively expensive for many. But, that situation (hopefully) won't last forever.

If games like Fallout 5, The Elder Scrolls 6, and Diablo 5 were Xbox Helix exclusive, it would undoubtedly drive masses of sales for Xbox hardware. But would the stock even be available? Microsoft has historically struggled with global distribution even before the component crisis. As much as I think Xbox desperately needs exclusive content, the risks are undeniable on paper.

But sacrificing the entire platform is just as risky potentially. PlayStation itself just massively clawed back from Steam and Windows PC gaming too.

There's little point in maintaining Xbox as an entity if it was to become a simple publisher. Microsoft is more of a hardware company than it has ever been arguably, powered by data centers and increasingly home grown silicon, like its new Maia chips which has driven the stock to new highs recently. Microsoft has already sacrificed mobile as a platform endpoint, greatly limiting its ability to distribute and train its AI platforms. I can't imagine they'll seek to make the same mistake with Xbox.

Surveys are just surveys, and it all might amount to nothing. It could also be a hint around Xbox's thought processes. Perhaps there's math that exists that proves that the juice just isn't worth the squeeze. Halo Campaign Evolved on PlayStation likely did irreparable brand damage to Xbox as a hardware entity, even though the game itself wasn't spectacularly well-received.

The future of Xbox could end up being more interesting than expected.

Join us on Reddit at r/WindowsCentral to share your insights and discuss our latest news, reviews, and more.

World of Warcraft has been my main gaming love for over two decades; I have multiple tattoos dedicated to the game. I built my career on top of it, and met my partner of 14 years because of it. So believe me when I say it HURTS to be feeling this way about the game.

World of Warcraft has never boasted the most amazing writing at a granular level, but at least it was often steeped in satisfying spectacle, leading with the "rule of cool" for better or worse. The setting was always what made it stand out, atop genuinely immersive background lore and major story beats that feel like the product of something greater. Or at least, should be the product of something greater.

I feel like since the disaster that was Shadowlands in back in 2020, Blizzard hasn't been able to find its narrative voice with World of Warcraft retail. I've written more than a few articles on the topic, but this week's major story resolution as part of Patch 12.1.5 is already seeing significant backlash.

Has Blizzard completely lost the plot here? SPOILERS AHEAD.

World of Warcraft *has* to be an episodic soap opera to function, but the payoff almost never materializes

As I sit to write this, I'm wondering to myself if eventually I'll eat some crow. There's always a flicker of curiosity in my mind about the way the game has moved forward since its most hated story arc, which demystified Death itself, reducing the universal stakes to almost nothing. Shadowlands effectively rendered death and dying as relatively inconsequential in the Warcraft universe, and the inconsistent behavior of some of its major characters, namely Sylvanas, single-handedly undid decades of character development and expectation.

Blizzard doesn't seem to have learned any lessons about stakes, and it's increasingly maddening given how well Diablo 4: Lord of Hatred, and even the recent Warcraft III: Forsaken Kingdom expansions prove that Blizzard can still write good shit. Why can't we have this in WoW retail?

In World of Warcraft: Midnight Patch 12.1.5, which launched today in Europe, Lady Liadrin, matriarch of the Horde Blood Elven paladins, dies. Her death is perhaps among the most anticlimactic, unceremonious, and understated deaths for a major character I've seen in video game history.

Blizzard has long held a strange joy for killing off Horde figures in unsatisfying and frankly wasteful ways. Whether it's Garrosh, Saurfang, Vol'jin, Cairne Bloodhoof ... at least some of these figures got meaningful deaths as part of an epic cutscene or CGI sequence. Liandrin simply passes out on a cavern floor, in a death that felt wholly unearned narratively and undeserved figuratively.

Throughout WoW: Midnight, Lady Liadrin has basically followed the player about, giving them quests and standing around while you did most of the busywork. Blizzard has rushed through troll and elf reunification, pushing aside thousands of years of baggage in a few relatively underwhelming quest segments that often feel pretty disconnected from the central battle against Xal'atath. That sense of disconnect extends to Liadrin in general, who hasn't really enjoyed enough build-up in my view to warrant what ultimately happened next.

In Patch 12.1.5, she channels her faith in the Light to deal a decisive blow to returning Old God general Kith'ix, who represents this patch's mid-season boss. The power seemingly overwhelms her, leading to her pretty unexpected demise on the cavern floor. I felt sadly bemused and mildly irritated. But not exactly shocked ... this has been par for the course as a Horde player for some time.

I saw the cutscene without any exposure to reactions online, and wondered if my immediate and overwhelming sense of dissatisfaction was simply a me problem. Apparently not. The backlash so far seems pretty palpable.

I feel as if Blizzard has tried to cram far too many characters in all at once in recent years, leaving them without meaningful story arcs. Mountains of supporting characters appeared as quickly as they then disappeared from the central narrative, robbing deaths like Liadrin's of any real sense of build-up, and therefore, no sense of payoff. It just feels awful, man. It's wild I find myself not even vaguely caring about the death of a character that has been in the game for almost 20 years ... what another miserable, maddening waste.

At least 12.1.5 has a new raid, a new "Mega Delve" to explore (which looks awesome), and other new content ... but man. For me, it has always started with caring about the setting, the roleplay, and feeling immersed in the world. Blizzard has been stripping that away with reckless abandon in recent years.

We have World of Warcraft: Forever coming up thankfully ... but game director Ion Hazzikostas promised me at BlizzCon that WoW: Retail wouldn't be left on the shelf as a result. That might not be his intention ... but it seems to be happening anyway.

Why is World of Warcraft: Retail's writing such a mess right now?

I'm still trying to speak to sources to get to the bottom of what's going on with World of Warcraft's writing so far. This isn't a matter of taste or sour grapes; I'm certainly not alone in thinking that WoW's writing has completely fallen off a cliff in recent years.

There are tons upon tons of issues with World of Warcraft's story delivery right now. I've theorized it's the self-imposed 8-week patch cadence, preventing quality and iteration from reaching the live client. I've huffed copium thinking that maybe, maybe there's going to be a payoff at the end of all this ... and that stuff like Liadrin's death will lead to something more interesting later, somehow?!

I've clung to hopium that Blizzard's appointment of franchise architect Chris Metzen might lead to somehow fixing the disaster that is Shadowlands in the wider narrative. I still have Vol'jin's urn in my inventory ...

Yeah ... I'm most likely just deluding myself at this point. And make no mistake, if Blizzard does somehow manage to pull off a gallery of major pay offs from all of this weirdness come The Last Titan, I'll be the first in line to apologize for my lack of faith. But, right now, I can't see it. After so many disappointments, cringeworthy story beats, and years upon years of unresolved plot threads — perhaps it's time for me to accept that WoW's retail writing team just isn't capable of delivering anything I find to be vaguely engaging.

The South Park team previously talked up a writing rule they follow, by which if your story beats can be linked by "and then" statements instead of "but" and "therefore" connections to denote consequences ... you've created something boring. I can't think of something more relatable to the current WoW writing style.

Things just keep happening for no real reason; "and then," it leads to no real consequences. There are too many plot threads going nowhere. Too many characters are half-baked and then sidelined, leading to various instances of "and then" instead of "therefore." Major lore points keep getting glossed over. Villains who vaguepost and scheme and tease and spend years leading us on to nowhere. Sylvanas showed up in Midnight for literally no reason. So many things keep happening for no reason.

RELATED: An ode to the Horde, and its weird erasure

Arator who? Turaylon when? Thrall where? There's not a single character left in WoW that isn't constantly wracked with self-doubting introspection, suffering from a terminal lack of conviction. Everything in WoW retail has become homogeneous sludge, and it's driving me crazy.

And perhaps worst of all, it's all just getting so, so boring.

World of Warcraft players deserve better.

Join us on Reddit at r/WindowsCentral to share your insights and discuss our latest news, reviews, and more.

It's time to finally wrap up this Gears of War: E-Day review, having now been able to grab a significant chunk of time in the multiplayer Siege mode.

For the review build, Gears of War: E-Day's new PvE multiplayer Siege mode was disabled. It felt odd to me to score a game I hadn't fully experienced as I and many others likely intended to play it. As such, this had previously been a review in progress. But now I'm ready to put a final say on proceedings.

Gears of War: E-Day is something of an important game for Xbox. It carries the flag for Microsoft's return to exclusive Xbox Series X|S games, and likely has some oversized pressure upon it to deliver. We're not here to review that aspect of the product, though — only what is here sitting in front of me.

Even upon reflection, my feelings on the campaign are a bit mixed. Thankfully, Gears of War: E-Day is a multi-faceted game, and Siege mode is an undeniably fun and genuinely well-considered evolution on the Horde-style gameplay, vastly elevating the overall package.

Gears of War: E-Day has some of the most stunning visuals I've ever seen committed to the medium, with absolutely immaculate lighting treatment, immense and meticulous city detailing, and gorgeous character work. The gunplay is also fantastic, smoothing off some of the series' rough edges with boosted mobility, without sacrificing the Gears feel.

But the overall campaign gameplay structure does the overall game a pretty sizeable disservice in my view, preventing it from reaching its full potential. Thankfully, Siege provides a satisfying canvas for future play, and the problems are by no means unfixable. Let's get into it.

Gears of War: E-Day review — Story, Art, and Tech

Gears of War: E-Day takes place over a decade before Gears of War 1, offering us a front-row seat to the brutal and genocidal opening to the Locust's attack on humanity.

The city of Kalona serves as ground zero for that invasion. Kalona is known as a city of science and technological progress, and was instrumental in developing the COG's weapons tech and industrial war economy during the civil war against the UIR. E-Day takes place six weeks after the UIR surrenders, and Dominic Santiago and Marcus Fenix are picking up the pieces and mourning lost friends and family.

The character work on offer in E-Day is absolutely top-shelf. The trauma of loss and the shock of the Locust invasion comes through incredibly well in every single aspect of the game's delivery. The cityscape is immaculately detailed, with interiors fully rendered with a lived-in feel, complemented by some of the best lighting I've ever seen in a video game.

I wish Gears of War: E-Day ran better on my Xbox Ally X, but it's hard to expect such a visually rich game to perform well on every potentially niche device. On its main platforms, namely Xbox Series X|S and compatible desktop PCs, Gears: E-Day absolutely sings. Make no mistake, Gears of War: E-Day is at the absolute apex of Unreal Engine technological prowess, and the game deserves awards on that basis alone, most likely.

Rendering the city in so much detail really helps serve the story. Gears of War's more recent games take place in a ruined world, where the Locust have effectively already won and decimated humanity and most of its cities. For E-Day, The Coalition had to show a city that was still thriving and populated, and the horrors therein.

From the very first cutscene, The Coalition pulls no punches: this is a horror story, a war story, and a tale of survival and desperation. The COG army is decimated and blindsided, besieged by an unknown threat that they immediately underestimate as monsters without a plan, only to discover later just how smart and organized the Locust actually are.

Civilian NPCs litter the city, sometimes fleeing, sometimes in dismembered puddles on the ground. The reactions from the characters and their development throughout the game really help to elevate that sense of loss and fear — they're not the battle-hardened survivors of the original Gears trilogy. They're young, war-weary from fighting the UIR, and in some cases wholly traumatized already.

I don't want to give too much away about the story, but this very much felt like the first game in a new planned trilogy ... there were aspects of the delivery that suffered as a result. Some plot threads felt designed to be resolved in future games (or DLC?), leaving me wanting somewhat. But the fact that I am eager to learn more about this Emergence Day story arc is probably a plus. It would be far worse if I didn't care, and I find myself caring a lot about the new characters, their struggles, their past lives, and what will ultimately end up happening to them ... given that some clearly aren't present in future installments.

Gears of War: E-Day's setting, visuals, and story delivery represent its best aspects. The game's performance on Xbox Series X is top-tier, with slowdown only occurring during some particularly heavy sequences towards the end. I didn't experience a single crash, and it's great to see a modern game offer split-screen co-op in the modern age as an option.

The new characters are interesting and engaging, and finding out new layers of existing characters is also rewarding as a long-time fan. I think Gears of War: E-Day could've benefitted from leaning more into civilian-oriented side stories potentially ... but as I'm going to explain in the gameplay section, Gears of War: E-Day's campaign is let down a fair bit by its gameplay structure all up.

Gears of War: E-Day review — Campaign Gameplay

Let's get the good stuff out of the way first: this is still very much Gears of War. Everything you've loved previously about Gears is still here, and in most cases, elevated to the 11th degree.

E-Day boosts the player character's mobility by a huge amount. Sprint is now more instantaneous and on the left stick like a standard modern shooter. Cover is far more dynamic than it was previously, with the ability to take cover in lower spaces than before, making environments feel more varied and natural. You can now also climb and vault, allowing The Coalition to build on the game's verticality. Given that Kalona is a city-state with large buildings and urban environments, having these features serves the game incredibly well.

The gunplay is also very polished. Chainsaw-ing dudes in half is more rewarding than ever, with almost embarrassingly satisfying sound treatment and chunky gore physics. Watching a severed torso flip onto the floor never gets old.

There's a variety of new weapons which are also instant classics. The Locust have been scavenging the battlefields of the Pendulum wars, adapting old UIR guns with horrifyingly inhumane enhancements. As such, that satisfying M1 Garand "ping" returns from the UIR Markza, repurposed into the axe-hilted Locust Breechshot rifle, for example.

The gunplay lets itself down a bit when it comes to fighting some of the game's bigger enemies, though. Drones, wretches, and some of the earlier enemies are by far the most satisfying to fight, reacting to your bullets and even having destructible armor that makes combat feel more dynamic and modern. I'm not sure why The Coalition didn't extend this gameplay style to some of its bigger enemies, which is where I would argue it'd be far more crucial.

Indeed, in Act 1, Gears of War: E-Day starts so strongly, and I was sitting there wondering if this was going to end up being the best game Xbox ever shipped, but over time, that feeling began to unravel.

Reavers, Brumaks, and other larger enemies barely react at all to gunfire, making them feel like robots or bullet sponges — something Gears 4 was heavily criticized for. You end up just watching the enemy's health bar in some cases for at least some semblance of reactivity, instead of the visuals The Coalition's art team painstakingly worked towards. Towards the end of the game, these types of enemies become more common too, robbing the game of some of its dynamism.

Another irritating aspect of Gears of War: E-Day pertains to its open-but-not-actually-open world design, which to me smacks of rushed or changing game design priorities throughout development.

Kalona is a fully realized 3D city, with a huge variety of urban exterior and interior locations. It's a great canvas that The Coalition can build upon when designing future content, potentially both for Siege and Versus mode. The problem is, it doesn't lend itself particularly well to the campaign mode.

Gears of War: E-Day starts incredibly strongly, with a linear cinematic segment that really sets the tone for the game. Then, it opens up into this odd semi-open world structure that seemed interesting in previews, but in practice, it doesn't really reach further than the glimpses we got over the summer.

There's a map that offers the illusion of large explorable spaces, but in practice, all the segments are very linear. Even the side objectives take place in a structured way, undermining the need or desire to really explore. It felt like The Coalition tried to shoehorn in more reasons to explore by spreading weapon mods and collectibles around, but I just found this aspect of the game to be irritating and pace-breaking.

There's dozens upon dozens of weapon mods to find in the field, but half the time it'll be for weapons you don't really want to use. The game pings you with an annoying pop-up every few seconds saying "hardcase nearby," which just served as a distraction given that the reward was mostly just junk items. Even the collectibles were annoying to find, given that you had to jump through several menus then go manually searching for the item you just found from a huge list. There were more mods to find than there was gameplay canvas upon which to place them ... E-Day really would've benefitted from some kind of vendor system instead here, allowing you to buy mods at your leisure, rather than feeling forced into boring hide-and-seek gameplay every 3 minutes.

These might seem like minor gripes, but given that there's not much else "new" here on offer across the general Gears formula, they stand out a bit like a sore thumb.

It doesn't help that, as a result of the game's structure, you end up revisiting the same locations multiple times as part of the story, which felt anticlimactic and choring, particularly towards the end of the game.

The campaign does have some incredibly epic, cinematic, and deeply emotional moments — don't get me wrong. There are some fantastic sequences spread throughout the game, showcasing Emergence in all of its reptilian, subterranean horror. I just wish they'd doubled up on these moments instead of trying this odd "open" world experiment, which seems ill-conceived and poorly executed, with features that detract rather than elevate the overall experience.

Gears of War: E-Day review — Siege Mode

Let me preface this by saying I've never been a big fan of Gears' brand of PvP combat, and you might want to look elsewhere for a take on that. Instead, my preference for Gears multiplayer has always fallen to its Horde mode, which has taken on a whole new life in E-Day.

Siege Mode takes twelve players split into teams of four, and drops them into a portion of Kalona's devastated township. Here, you take on the role of one of the Gears during E-Day in progress, tackling side objectives, battling waves of enemies, setting up killzones, and grinding upgrades. This is where some aspects of the campaign's "open world" gameplay really shines through in ways that it didn't when there was a cinematic story to tell on top of it all.

The new mobility gives Siege maps a great deal of verticality and strategical elements. Four character classes offer some soft class roles, with snipers lending cover while medics revive fallen players. As you progress, you can hybridize a bit, equipping your medic with a sniper rifle for example from the outset, while still maintaining access to your "ultimate" ability kit items that can change the tide of battle for your squad.

It's impressive how well Gears of War: E-Day's multiplayer maps work in practice, they're incredibly large and have a lot going on simultaneously across the play space, giving it a sense of frantic urgency. As you're completing your missions, you may cross paths with another squad as is often the case in the campaign, leading to epic and emergent gameplay moments.

Invasion events spawn huge bosses like Brumaks and Corpsers, charging all 12 players to come together to bring them down. My complaint about them feeling a bit "spongey" persists here, but it's far more exciting tackling these towering behemoths in a big multiplayer setting, all while getting swarmed by lesser enemies like wretches and drones.

There's some mild and quite forgiving extraction gameplay here too. Side objectives and invasion events reward you with parts to upgrade your weapons and classes. If your squad fails to complete your mission for whatever reason, you will lose those weapon parts. Siege does give you a lot of leeway to avoid failure, though, even on the higher difficulties, detracting from the sense of urgency a bit.

I think The Coalition could've done a bit more to enhance the "emergent" gameplay moments and social interaction aspects. There are no emotes for example, which feels odd. Siege clearly takes some inspiration from Helldivers 2, but omits some of its more interactive and engaging innovations, which is a shame. But hey, it's all potential things to include in future seasons and updates, maybe?

We're not reviewing the future though, we're reviewing the now. And the now of Siege mode is already fantastic. Getting a capable squad together and putting yourself through the meat grinder is a ton of fun. Setting up batteries of mortar sentries and watching them rain down shells like an explosive hailstorm is endlessly satisfying. The potential here is clear and exciting.

What The Coalition has built here is as technically impressive as it is infectious. If the update cadence is solid, I can see me sticking with Gears of War: E-Day's Siege Mode remaining in my multiplayer rotation for some time.

Gears of War: E-Day review — Conclusion

I thoroughly enjoyed Gears of War: E-Day overall, and am already enjoying my second playthrough on a higher difficulty, but I would be lying if I said the game didn't have large campaign issues — particularly given how easily avoided many of them could've been.

Kalona is an immaculate canvas ripe for telling epic stories. The new, horror-laden tone is absolutely the right direction for Gears of War: E-Day. The existential dread oozes throughout every character delivery, and the city design is among the best the medium has ever seen.

DEAL: Get Surfshark VPN 86% OFF with Windows Central 🦈

The gameplay structure placed on top of the campaign becomes the problem. It could've used a lot more iteration and forethought. It felt a bit like E-Day was originally intended to be some form of open-world, but at some point, they retreated, leaving it feeling disjointed. The "open world" aspects work far better in Gears of War: E-Day's siege mode, where side objectives, upgrades, and mission rewards actually feed a far more satisfying upgrade loop. In the campaign, they feel a bit more like irritants and roadbumps.

If I were to score the game based on the campaign alone, I'd probably give it an 8/10 overall — it's still incredibly fun, and the downsides are frustrating but not game-breaking. Siege mode elevates the overall package to a 9/10 for me. What doesn't work as well in the Campaign works incredibly well in Siege, and the potential for its future is quite clear.

The Coalition could probably do a little more to think outside of the box to stave off franchise fatigue and defy expectations, but the consistency of this franchise feels like coming home every time — which certainly has its own merits in today's times.

Long may Gears live.

Gears of War: E-Day launched October 6, 2026, exclusively on Xbox Series X|S on console with Xbox Play Anywhere for PC, it's also on Steam and Xbox Game Pass.

Join us on Reddit at r/WindowsCentral to share your insights and discuss our latest news, reviews, and more.

Microsoft has been responsible for some pretty compelling innovations in the gaming space over the years, from everything including DirectX in decades past to more recent stuff like Xbox's disc-to-digital program or Xbox backwards compatibility on console and now Windows PC. Microsoft is now formalizing a team dedicated to exploring these unique and potentially transformative features.

Dubbed "Xbox Labs," Microsoft is formalizing the team that will research and work on new technologies across its gaming stack. The team there will work on new compatibility layers, such as bringing Xbox games to Apple silicon and WebGL, while also exploring the rise of reverse-engineered AI mods and games such as the recent 128-player Halo title that went viral a few weeks ago.

DEAL: Get Surfshark VPN 86% OFF with Windows Central 🦈

Microsoft, like many in the gaming industry, are wondering about how to reach more users. Xbox announced "XP" recently, designed to bring more of its franchises into the real world via marketing collabs, merchandising, and even theme parks. Microsoft has also been putting its biggest franchises onto PlayStation as it seeks more users therein, and also pushing Xbox Cloud Gaming as an option for those who don't want the upfront cost of buying a console.

Microsoft has struggled to maintain pace with the growth of the PlayStation 5, Nintendo Switch platform, or Steam on PC, but made a sprint of acquisitions in a bet to at least sell games on those platforms. Titles like Call of Duty, Minecraft, and Forza Horizon are dominant off Xbox, but the decline of Xbox as a platform has been painful for fans to watch.

Incoming Xbox CEO Asha Sharma is charged with reviving Xbox's fortunes in this space. There's been a lot of promises to fans, including returning to exclusive games (starting with Gears of War: E-Day), and doubling down on new updates for Xbox Series X|S consoles, which recently included the addition of Mythic completion achievements. However, it has come at the cost of thousands of Xbox job losses via redundancies and divestitures, leaving a vast trail of disrupted lives in its wake.

Sharma noted in a town hall meeting with Xbox staff last week that it can't rely on past wins as it seeks to shape the future. AI and other technologies are rapidly disrupting what gaming will actually be in the next decade, as attention and access gets disrupted by AI-borne RAMpocalypse. The content cadence is likely to vastly saturate the addressable audience too, leading to a dilution in attention and spend.

In my view, it's pretty clear Sharma is right that technological platform innovation is absolutely necessary to navigate this "new world" being foisted upon us (by, well ... Microsoft itself), but it remains unclear when Xbox Labs' first innovations will materialize for users or developers. For those interested, a bit more "wait and see" is likely on the menu.

Join us on Reddit at r/WindowsCentral to share your insights and discuss our latest news, reviews, and more.