the inflation idea isn't bad, as long as you don't put much stock into it. It helps you to have a warm fuzzy feeling when your computer is up to the task. The WEI's final score was the score of your weakest link. So if your components had a 10 but your disk scored 1, the overall of your system would be 1. HDDs, no matter what, even if you had the best hard drive ever, topped at a certain score.In the end I think that idea was doomed to fail. Reason being, as tech advanced, what as a 9.4 five years ago maybe became a 7.6. If you kept it out of ten, as increasing tech raised the ceiling on a ten, everyone's existing specs would have to be re-evaluated lower. As such, that score would go down over time for all users. "Why's my computer getting worse?!" "Oh, you need to upgrade." Not a good look.
Or, you have an uncapped score and just let inflation take its toll. "This game needs a 7.5 minimum." I'm good. "This game needs a 9.6." "This game needs a 12.5" 15.8. 32.9. 76.3.
In short, as an absolute score the numbers would just go up and up and up over time. As a relative score, user machine scores would go down over time which would be a really bad look.
I guess if you wanted to maintain that concept, you'd want to bracket it in 'generations'. Set a score for now based on XBSX. Then introduce a next-gen score at a particular date (coinciding with a new console or spec) for a new score against a new benchmark. That way the score wouldn't go down over time but would be fixed for that generation of software.
Xbox as the base hardware to follow requirements sounds better. Also, if they create certified builds like Xboy Performance, Xboy Sony VAIO, Xboy Quality, Xboy Path Tracing.., as long as the driver of the selected components are up to the task....
It's not like they don't have certifications already. In fact Copilot+ is a certification for certain PCs, so it's entirely possible to build upon that but for gaming.
Copilot+ PC hardware requirements - Microsoft Support
support.microsoft.com