E3 EDIT, June 19 EDIT: Xbox One. November 21. £429, Euro 499, $499. Launch Line-up Includes Ryse and Forza 5. Console does not function without Kinect. Deal with NFL to provide football or something, North America Only. Works in conjunction with your Set top Box to provide TV with Kinect/Windows 8 interface. Partnership with Twitch.tv.
The only games shown were EA sports '14 line up, Forza 5, about 30 seconds of cutscene from a Time travel game (real world FBI kinda thing) and the newest COD.
If you want a really cool set top box i recommend it. Some Of the features demoed seemed pretty neato.
What a tragic waste of title- it would have been so cool to call it the X-box OBX, and pull off an anagram as long as we're making it a silly name. I mean, it is the third system of the name, you shouldn't call it one. Even X-Box Alpha would have been better.
Of course, I personally would have loved an X-box Ox, complete with a horn bearing SE, but I realize that would only really appeal to my peculiar sense of humor.
It looked alright overall, though some worrisome parts tbh...
The no backwards compat is a shame, but understandable - completely different architecture and all that.
The preowned fee... while really annoying, is... kind of understandable and not entirely surprising (a lot of games already have it for online multiplayer.) Depends on just how much it is at the end of the day for my final comment on that.
There's things we just don't know yet... and I can't from a solid opinion till then, though everything looks damn shiny so far.
And why no mention of Illumiroom! I want Illumiroom dammit!
I couldn't tell from the article, but would that prevent me from taking a game round my friends to play on their console for example?
No backwards compatibility seems like a terrible move too.
You will have to pay for every other console you want to install a game on.
Not quite. As far as I can tell, so long as you log into your friends xbox with your account, you'll be fine. Lending it to your friends however, won't really work anymore.
Yea I was pretty underwhelmed as well. The only thing that I took from it that I liked, was the new controller looks pretty nice. The Dpad doesnt look like melted plastic, and the joysticks look like they would REALLY grip your thumbs. Other than that, I dont really care. And TBH, Id be surprised if the new kinnect works nearly as well as they demoed it. As a Kinnect owner, Im pretty sour of the whole experience, so yea.
I also own a Kinect, and with several years working on it, and what people can do with a Kinect hooked up to a PC already, it's entirely believable.
At the end of the day, it's going to be months till we get a solid picture of it, the costs and pros and cons, and probably about 6 months after release till we really know the pros and cons.
KingCracker wrote: Yea I was pretty underwhelmed as well. The only thing that I took from it that I liked, was the new controller looks pretty nice. The Dpad doesnt look like melted plastic, and the joysticks look like they would REALLY grip your thumbs. Other than that, I dont really care. And TBH, Id be surprised if the new kinnect works nearly as well as they demoed it. As a Kinnect owner, Im pretty sour of the whole experience, so yea.
The problem with the current kinect is the fact it is going through a USB 1.0 port into the existing xbox hardware, which is a massive bottleneck.
I imagine the new kinect is going to be pretty incredible considering what I've seen done on the PC with it.
Ovion wrote: It looked alright overall, though some worrisome parts tbh...
The no backwards compat is a shame, but understandable - completely different architecture and all that.
The preowned fee... while really annoying, is... kind of understandable and not entirely surprising (a lot of games already have it for online multiplayer.)
Depends on just how much it is at the end of the day for my final comment on that.
There's things we just don't know yet... and I can't from a solid opinion till then, though everything looks damn shiny so far.
And why no mention of Illumiroom! I want Illumiroom dammit!
I couldn't tell from the article, but would that prevent me from taking a game round my friends to play on their console for example?
No backwards compatibility seems like a terrible move too.
You will have to pay for every other console you want to install a game on.
Not quite.
As far as I can tell, so long as you log into your friends xbox with your account, you'll be fine.
Lending it to your friends however, won't really work anymore.
Ehm, no. It's not tied to account, it's tied to the console.
I have all sorts of stuff for mutimedia, and I don't really care that much about controlling it with Kinect. I'll have more of an opinion when they actually show some games*, which is why I play video games in the first place.
*I imagine that E3 will be were the games are shown.
If you can find something explicitly stating otherwise, but till then, I'll go with what little solid info we've got atm.
That's largely irrelevant, even if it's true that means that the only people that could play used games are those without an xbox live account who are offline. This is using the 360 system as an example, who says you will even be able to create an offline profile on the 1box?
Squidmanlolz wrote:Well, I didn't buy an alienware for nothing...
The only console game that I care about is Destiny, guess that I'll be playing it on the 360...
Being you can make a computer twice as powerful for the price of an Alienware....
But yeah, I assumed we'll see more game related stuff out of E3.
Heres a good way for the 1box to win E3. Buy out Oculus, make the rift 1box exclusive. Microsoft doesn't make televisions, also alot of the features for the 1box are already done by Smart TVs, which are a real focus of giants like LG and Samsung.
IMO that would be a game changer, which is something Microsoft desperately needs. At this point only a playable Halo Mmo build or the return of Blinkz the timesweeper at E3 could turn it around.
Another crappy thing about the XBox One is that you can't bring over all of your XBox Live Arcade games.
But you can bring your Gamerscore!
Personally, I think Microsoft messed up big time here. If they offered backwards compatibility and/or the ability to bring over my XBLA games then it would be a no-brainer for me as I'm already invested with my 360. But by taking that all away from me, it's basically a clean slate; I have absolutely no incentive to get a XBox One now and can start thinking about whether or not I should get a PS4 instead.
And considering that *currently* it seems like PSN+ is a better deal than XBox Live, I may very well go that route.
Maybe i will just take my friends offer to help my build a gaming comp.
A fee for used games? No thankyou. I have to log onto x-box for my game? No thankyou.
I could forgive all of that, except it always being connected to kinenct.
This would be great. If I didn't already have a PVR, blue ray player and a computer for browsing the internet. Hopefully they'll sell some sort of bare bones version.
Weeeelll, seeing as I only use my 360 to watch Netflix/Hulu in the living room and amuse my girlfriend's sisters with fruit ninja and other Kinect games when they come over, this seems pretty well tailored to me. On the other hand, I only use my 360 to watch Netflix/Hulu in the living room and amuse my girlfriend's sisters with fruit ninja and other Kinect games when they come over, so I have no desire to buy a whole new system.
E3 is pretty much just for the game press, not casuals. Though I'm sure everyone will welcome an E3 that's actually about games and not about... whatever the feth Microsoft has been doing at E3 the last four years
daedalus-templarius wrote: Personally I thought the cross-media stuff sounds great, since I use my current xbox for all of those things now.
Indeed, and who doesn't want to pay more to do the things they are already doing?
This. I think Microsoft is pushing the multi-media aspects of the system because that's what a lot of people use it for, but really, who wants to buy one in the first place when the gaming side gets ignored? Especially since PC's are cheaper for multi-media (in the sense that everyone has a computer anyway and no one charges you monthly fees to access Netflix and Hulu on a computer).
daedalus-templarius wrote: I mean really, some of the new stuff they showed on the nextbox is literally not capable on the 8 year old hardware we have now.
Hyperthreading wasn't possible on old Intel processor designs, but Intel never bother to stop and ask "who is really wants this feature?" I think Microsoft has fallen into the pit of providing features no one really wanted (That's pretty much the kinect in a nutshell). But then again maybe I'm just out of touch. Turning the Xbox into a social networking platform is all well and good, but I doubt they can sustain that market while charging monthly fees for things that are free elsewhere (especially with the rumors that XBL is gonna get a price hike this year).
daedalus-templarius wrote: I mean really, some of the new stuff they showed on the nextbox is literally not capable on the 8 year old hardware we have now.
Hyperthreading wasn't possible on old Intel processor designs, but Intel never bother to stop and ask "who is really wants this feature?" I think Microsoft has fallen into the pit of providing features no one really wanted (That's pretty much the kinect in a nutshell). But then again maybe I'm just out of touch. Turning the Xbox into a social networking platform is all well and good, but I doubt they can sustain that market while charging monthly fees for things that are free elsewhere (especially with the rumors that XBL is gonna get a price hike this year).
But... they have like 50 million plus subscribers to xbox live right now...
I mean, they certainly are 'sustaining' their current market!
I doubt they will raise the price of XBL, but I guess we won't find out until later.
I mean, they certainly are 'sustaining' their current market!
WoW just lost over a million subs last month. Just because the player base is stable now doesn't mean it always will be. And if you're building your market around features that people might find convenient but won't necessarily shell out cash for in themselves, the question should be asked if its a good way to spend money.
Right now for example, how many XBL subscriptions exist solely to watch Netflix? My guess is none. No one is dumb enough to waste $15 a month on XBL when they can watch Netflix free on a computer. But Microsoft took the numbers showing that more people engaged in Netflix than video games on XBL and are running wild with it, forgetting that few people probably got XBL for Netflix and rather use it because they've already paid for XBL and they might as well.
I doubt they will raise the price of XBL, but I guess we won't find out until later.
That's what people said back in 2010. Microsoft just upped XBL's server count by over 300,000 servers. They're adding a mountain of new features, and thus far they've refused every chance to deny that the new XBox will be always online (on top of all the other online components of installing and playing games on it in the first place). Subscription growth has been steady but it's not like its exploding or anything. EDIT: And they want to setup a cloud system (though god knows for what reason...)
The price is going up or Microsoft is gonna start hemorrhaging cash on the most profitable side of their game system outside of product licensing (and Sony seems cool with that, Microsoft I doubt is).
Hmm, hard to judge at this stage, but this certainly isn't helped by the lack of games on show for either console. It does seem Microsoft is looking at exclusives aplenty mind.
I think chances are I'll still be looking at both, but I am very thankful it looks like the points will transfer over, I don't mind XBLA stuff going, I wasn't expecting it to all transfer over overnight at their end anyway, so the idea of the stuff I've downloaded being trapped 360 side isn't the end of the world, but a clean slate on the points may have been a nail in my decision over the two machines if I did pick one.
Backwards compatibility doesn't surprise me, but a shame, although at least this time I have three 360's to keep safely in the closet to play older games. (Unlike my poor old xbox that died and removed my ability to play Timesplitters.)
All the media stuff is a big meh from me, but then so was the stuff in the PS4 announce, the kinect thing is annoying, but I hope I can turn it off like the current one, being part of the console is one thing, being on would be another.
Apart from that, nothing else I've seen bothers me any, I enjoyed the rage last night about the Paying full price for borrowed games, until someone from Microsoft clarified what they meant. Although I don't think much of the rage stopped.
I just hope the danged thing has a bloody big hard drive, as if this console lasts as long as the 360, that is a lot of games we'd need to install.
I'll probably wait a couple of years for it to go down in price and than compare and contrast it with the PS4 and then decide which I'll buy (maybe even both).
Automatically Appended Next Post: I still have plenty of 360 games I want to beat so I have no desire to rush out and buy this on release day.
I can't see myself getting one of these. I mean, the features and technology involved are pretty neat, but I don't want or need voice-recognition, motion-sensors or Kinect. I think the pre-owned games fee is a bit of a joke, bordering on a bit of an insult to be honest: Previously there has been no issue about pre-owned games as far as I'm aware, and now they just want to make a few bucks out of it.
If they release a version with fewer features like the old 360 Arcade then I might be tempted, but as it stands, I'm not interested at all, in fact I'm rather put-off by the concept of the Kinect watching and recording my every movement: if it came to that I'd just stick a photo of my balls over the lens and see who gives in first.
If EA can be made to feel bad abouy online passes for second hand games and change their policy, im not really sure why microsoft is so busy going ahead with making account locked features a big thing.
I have no inyerest in kinect and dont want the system connected to my xbox all the time listening and watching in. I have no interest in controlling my console by voice or flailing my arms.
I dont have a problem putting discs into the console to play games so why have installs for all gamea?
Console itself is fugly.
The gamea are going to cost a minimum of 60 quid new (my own preduction) and them i may well have to pay for additional keys for my wife to play.
Be much cheaper in the long run to fix up my pc and hook it up to the tv for games and tv.
Well I guess we know which side will win this generation's console war.
Win?
To me it looks like they all lose because none of them has any gaems.
Sony seems to be playing their cards well right now. All they have to do is look at all the negative rumors swirling around the new Xbox that Microsoft doesn't even deny and say "Hey everyone, we're not gonna do that."
Microsoft and Sony haven't been major proponents of pushing their consoles with games for a long time. Why bother when multi-platform titles are the mainstay of the market? Microsoft is certainly pushing the 'we have exclusives button' but they don't even say what those exclusives are and they're all probably kinect games anyway (+ Halo + Respawn Entertainment). Even the past couple E3's for both companies were much more about selling console features (that no one really wanted kinect *cough cough*) rather than selling games. The games will come on their own.
Also:
Assassin's Creed IV: Black Flag
Battlefield 4
Call of Duty: Ghosts
Cyberpunk 2077
Deep Down
Destiny Bungie
Diablo III
Doki Doki Universe
Driveclub
Hohokum
Infamous: Second Son
Killzone: Shadow Fall
Knack
Lords of the Fallen
Primal Carnage: Genesis
Project Heart and Soul
The Evil Within
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt
The Witness
Thief
War Thunder
Watch Dogs
Wolfenstein: The New Order
^^^ The list of games known to be in development for the PS4. At least five are known to be in development for the XBox 1 but we can safely assume that all these games will be on both consoles save Kill Zone and Diablo III.
Console itself is fugly.
I still say it looks like a Beta Max player. That makes it retro.
Well I guess we know which side will win this generation's console war.
Win?
To me it looks like they all lose because none of them has any gaems.
Sony seems to be playing their cards well right now. All they have to do is look at all the negative rumors swirling around the new Xbox that Microsoft doesn't even deny and say "Hey everyone, we're not gonna do that."
Microsoft and Sony haven't been major proponents of pushing their consoles with games for a long time. Why bother when multi-platform titles are the mainstay of the market? Microsoft is certainly pushing the 'we have exclusives button' but they don't even say what those exclusives are and they're all probably kinect games anyway (+ Halo + Respawn Entertainment). Even the past couple E3's for both companies were much more about selling console features (that no one really wanted kinect *cough cough*) rather than selling games. The games will come on their own.
Also:
Assassin's Creed IV: Black Flag
Battlefield 4
Call of Duty: Ghosts
Cyberpunk 2077
Deep Down
Destiny Bungie
Diablo III
Doki Doki Universe
Driveclub
Hohokum
Infamous: Second Son
Killzone: Shadow Fall
Knack
Lords of the Fallen
Primal Carnage: Genesis
Project Heart and Soul
The Evil Within
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt
The Witness
Thief
War Thunder
Watch Dogs
Wolfenstein: The New Order
^^^ The list of games known to be in development for the PS4. At least five are known to be in development for the XBox 1 but we can safely assume that all these games will be on both consoles save Kill Zone and Diablo III.
Console itself is fugly.
I still say it looks like a Beta Max player. That makes it retro.
Giant shoulder pads are retro too and they still look stupid
Just Dave wrote: Personally, I feel it's too early to be giving up on it yet: I feel there's a lot of time for things to change and more stuff revealed.
It's not looking hopeful, yeah, but hey, it's not like I'm gonna buy a playstation!
Xbox One is a terrible name though. Surely that would be the original Xbox. 720 or (more so) infinity were much better names IMHO.
I dunno if I agree completely or not. I will agree its not very hopeful right now, I know I certainly WONT buy Xbox1.............and speaking of.....yea, terrible fracking name. I mean.......blech! Name a worse named system..... I dare ya
I'm honestly not sure about these new consoles, they don't seem a great deal different from what we already have. Sure there are a new bunch of toys packaged with them but what will they bring games wise? If it's just going to be a whole new batch of exactly the same thing we have now then whats the point to them.
Just Dave wrote: Personally, I feel it's too early to be giving up on it yet: I feel there's a lot of time for things to change and more stuff revealed.
It's not looking hopeful, yeah, but hey, it's not like I'm gonna buy a playstation!
Xbox One is a terrible name though. Surely that would be the original Xbox. 720 or (more so) infinity were much better names IMHO.
I dunno if I agree completely or not. I will agree its not very hopeful right now, I know I certainly WONT buy Xbox1.............and speaking of.....yea, terrible fracking name. I mean.......blech! Name a worse named system..... I dare ya
Just Dave wrote: Personally, I feel it's too early to be giving up on it yet: I feel there's a lot of time for things to change and more stuff revealed.
It's not looking hopeful, yeah, but hey, it's not like I'm gonna buy a playstation!
Xbox One is a terrible name though. Surely that would be the original Xbox. 720 or (more so) infinity were much better names IMHO.
I dunno if I agree completely or not. I will agree its not very hopeful right now, I know I certainly WONT buy Xbox1.............and speaking of.....yea, terrible fracking name. I mean.......blech! Name a worse named system..... I dare ya
Ummm... Uhhhh... Well... Ummmm...
We all had a chuckle at "Wii" at first?
Ill be honest, when I first saw the name of the Wii, I thought it was pronounced WHY. And I thought "WTF would you name it WHY for?!?" lol
Thought Color TV Game takes the cake. I will still say, that was an OLD system lol. Youd think a company would name it better then XBOXone.....god that isnt getting any better
To me it looks like they all lose because none of them has any gaems.
Also:
Assassin's Creed IV: Black Flag
Battlefield 4
Call of Duty: Ghosts
Cyberpunk 2077
Deep Down
Destiny Bungie
Diablo III
Doki Doki Universe
Driveclub
Hohokum
Infamous: Second Son
Killzone: Shadow Fall
Knack
Lords of the Fallen
Primal Carnage: Genesis
Project Heart and Soul
The Evil Within
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt
The Witness
Thief
War Thunder
Watch Dogs
Wolfenstein: The New Order
^^^ The list of games known to be in development for the PS4. At least five are known to be in development for the XBox 1 but we can safely assume that all these games will be on both consoles save Kill Zone and Diablo III.
Most of those games will have/ has a pc port and that means the best version is the pc version. Rest are propably not worth your time.
I assume it is exclusive to PS4 on the console front as a PS4 version was suspected and announced quite some time ago but no word at all on an Xbox version of the game. My suspicion is that the RMAH and XBL as concepts don't get along (i.e. Microsoft ain't gonna allow it unless they get their cut, and Acti-Blizz gave them the middle finger).
So far Sony is winning me over with the "Not a Douche Bag about Always Online" card, though there's still room for Microsoft to put those rumors to rest until release. I like my PC but consoles are where I have to go to get my JRPG fix, and Play Station has always had the leg up on that front anyway. Unfortunately I loathe Sony hardware >.< It's like choosing between a giant douche and a turd sandwich. Someone should make a tv episode about that.
I think it is their own fault the reaction is this way, however, this could all be quickly forgotten at E3 if they have a strong and detailed showing -
the presentation was horrible, the xbox looks like a VCR if anyone remembers what those are, what is this being based around TV I have this unique button on my remote called TV/Video that allows me to toggle between cable and my game system and are they seriously basing a COD game around a dog companion that looks like a cry for help, and motion controlled Kinect is still on it? after seeing this im glad I have a WiiU they seem to know what a gaming system is for, just goes to show that companies have run out of ideas.
Even though I have a PS3 (draws in hate) I still thought of one good thing about the Xbox one....no 9yr olds on CoD as they cannot afford a Xbox one (unless they are rich)
also bill gates cant count.
MajorTom11 wrote: I think it is their own fault the reaction is this way, however, this could all be quickly forgotten at E3 if they have a strong and detailed showing -
I don't think that's true.
Microsoft had made it clear that the thing yesterday was about unveiling the console, not the full catalog of launch games.
Medium of Death and I watched the reveal yesterday on XBL, talking the whole while. It sucks that they did not unveil everything coming out...but at the same time, this close to E3 that would have been just as bad.
Microsoft came out hard with things which are going to solidify some sales to undecided.
Having exclusives for FIFA and Madden?
That's a big deal to some people.
Having DLC access "first" for Call of Duty: Ghosts?
Again, that's a big deal to some people.
15 exclusives, with 8 of them being "new properties" and 7 of them being returning properties(of which you can pretty much guarantee Halo is one) is also a "big deal" in early adoption rates for consoles.
Wow, if that's correct.. that is massive, bigger than anything else I've seen. I know a load of folks who will get a xbox regardless of other factors if that is true.
Wow, if that's correct.. that is massive, bigger than anything else I've seen. I know a load of folks who will get a xbox regardless of other factors if that is true.
That was something they actually announced during the Xbox One reveal yesterday.
FIFA's "Ultimate Teams" are Xbox Exclusive and Madden has some exclusives; alongside of Microsoft actually now 'sponsoring' the various NFL teams with technological support.
Morathi's Darkest Sin wrote: Ah, team exclusives.. for a second there I thought you meant game. Not as much of an issue.
Yeah, sports games aren't big on exclusivity.
Forza is going to be a big draw, but PS4 has its own exclusive racing game to counter.
With the sports crowd, it usually comes down to who has what exclusives and whether or not the playerbase want them.
With game installs and disc-less gaming i wonder if the disks will have some unique identifier on them the machine can recognise to prevent people just splitting the cost of a new game between them and then buying a play code for much less than the cost new...
I know PC gamers like to crow about "master race" but what it fails to deliver is adequate multi-seat for me and my family. It's primarily a one-person, one-screen type of gaming experiance - with all the ipods, iphones and nooks that my kids have their noses buried in, I'd rather not fire up a system that takes me even further away from interacting with people in the same room.
With a console, at least I can have friends and family over and we can enjoy the same game experiance
Actually, it's mostly the more trollish console players that mention that term.
Or the PC players who feel the need to crow about the fact that they're PC players.
Anyways, it doesn't really bloody matter so let's get back on topic shall we?
SilverMK2 wrote:With game installs and disc-less gaming i wonder if the disks will have some unique identifier on them the machine can recognise to prevent people just splitting the cost of a new game between them and then buying a play code for much less than the cost new...
They've pretty much confirmed that yes the discs will have a unique identifier on them.
15 exclusives, with 8 of them being "new properties" and 7 of them being returning properties(of which you can pretty much guarantee Halo is one) is also a "big deal" in early adoption rates for consoles.
And how many of those are gonna be Kinect titles? We already know of one (Ryse). One is probably the new Respawn Entertainment title.
Having a bunch of exclusive titles is meaningless. Nintendo offers practically nothing but exclusive titles to sell their brand and it hasn't really brought them huge success. If they're mostly games no one cares for or they're on a system no one likes, it won't amount to much (and I'd bet real money most of those exclusives turn out to be Kinect games).
Exclusives haven't sold consoles since the first XBox whose success could largely be attributed to its stellar launch lineup and a strong year of releases. But even then XBox's superior exclusive titles never allowed it to beat the PS2, and Nintendo hasn't won a console war since the N64 with an all-star lineup. Usually the console that comes out first wins, but Nintendo threw away their early release advantage. The One and PS4 look to be aiming for a release around the same time and price will probably be the deciding factor (and maybe some brand pride).
EDIT: Basically I'm saying that inspite of what the console makers have often thought, historically exclusive titles haven't really sold consoles in a long time when third party developers have increasingly moved towards multiplatform releases. Sure some people will buy a XBox solely to play the next Halo title, and a PS4 solely for Killzone but the number of people swayed that way isn't that big.
Forza is going to be a big draw, but PS4 has its own exclusive racing game to counter.
To Forza's favor is the fact that Grand Turismo spends most of its time spinning its wheels (pun hehe).
15 exclusives, with 8 of them being "new properties" and 7 of them being returning properties(of which you can pretty much guarantee Halo is one) is also a "big deal" in early adoption rates for consoles.
And how many of those are gonna be Kinect titles? We already know of one (Ryse). One is probably the new Respawn Entertainment title.
Having a bunch of exclusive titles is meaningless. Nintendo offers practically nothing but exclusive titles to sell their brand and it hasn't really brought them huge success. If they're mostly games no one cares for or they're on a system no one likes, it won't amount to much (and I'd bet real money most of those exclusives turn out to be Kinect games).
I would be surprised if they're purely Kinect titles. Most things are going to have some form of Kinect functionality though. That's pretty much a guarantee at this point.
Exclusives haven't sold consoles since the first XBox whose success could largely be attributed to its stellar launch lineup and a strong year of releases. But even then XBox's superior exclusive titles never allowed it to beat the PS2, and Nintendo hasn't won a console war since the N64 with an all-star lineup. Usually the console that comes out first wins, but Nintendo threw away their early release advantage. The One and PS4 look to be aiming for a release around the same time and price will probably be the deciding factor (and maybe some brand pride).
EDIT: Basically I'm saying that inspite of what the console makers have often thought, historically exclusive titles haven't really sold consoles in a long time when third party developers have increasingly moved towards multiplatform releases. Sure some people will buy a XBox solely to play the next Halo title, and a PS4 solely for Killzone but the number of people swayed that way isn't that big.
It might not be that big, but it still is a factor.
While most people aren't going to say "Oh, I'm going to buy an Xbox just to play Halo 5!"--they might be saying "Well, I want to play Halo 5 and most of the people that I have played with are on the Xbox. Why would I buy a PS4?".
Well we know Respawns game is a Scifi shooter (possible named 'Titan'). I doubt they'll all be kinect games. I'm suspecting Respawns title, a new Halo related title, a Gears related title (maybe). There are still rumors whirling about a new Mechwarrior game in spite of MWO and I think Microsoft still owns the rights and Mech Assault made them good money.
Swan-of-War wrote: I know PC gamers like to crow about "master race" but what it fails to deliver is adequate multi-seat for me and my family. It's primarily a one-person, one-screen type of gaming experiance - with all the ipods, iphones and nooks that my kids have their noses buried in, I'd rather not fire up a system that takes me even further away from interacting with people in the same room.
With a console, at least I can have friends and family over and we can enjoy the same game experiance
Why is that every pro- console owner uses this argument? It was bs 10 years ago, it is bs today.
It isn't bs in the sense that you don't normally see PC games that have multiple users simultaneously on a single machine (dedicated servers don't count ). Of course, console games have been trying to phase split screening out for years.
Kanluwen wrote: The "PS4 exclusive" tag in terms of Diablo 4 is going to be hyped to hell and back because, outside of the PC, it will be exclusive to the PS4.
In other words... it's not exclusive.
Kanluwen wrote: Or the PC players who feel the need to crow about the fact that they're PC players.
The "PC Master Race" thing? No.
Kanluwen wrote: Anyways, it doesn't really bloody matter so let's get back on topic shall we?
Shutting down people attempting to start up a console war is usually worth it.
Article about the pre-owned block on the Xbox One (still can't get over that name), suggesting that you'll be able to trade in your games digitally/via Xbox Live; which effectively grants Microsoft control over the pre-owned games market.
You'll also be able to take games round your friends if you sign in on Xbox Live.
Must say it was a lot better than Sonys PS4 reveal in wich they didn't reveal their console.. at all. Even though it was a console reveal.
The console reveaI was about the console as it should be and I understand MS for not showing all the new tittles with E3 just around the corner. Why show everything and not having anything left for E3?
I really don't get why people are whining about some stuff about it. Like the 2nd hand games, every game as of late on PS4 or Xbox360 has codes to unlock most of the games. So if you sell them you'd need to buy a new code to make it work again.
The original xbox is what brought me back to console gaming after a 10 year stretch of ignoring it and it's possible that the xbox one will cure me of console gaming interest.
No backward compatibility? Inability to work if my internet goes out for more than 24 hours? Mandatory kinect use that reminds me of the big brother wall terminals in 1984? Hard drive that can't be swapped out? Used games requiring a second fee to "activate" and maybe full price? It's too early to tell but the news so far isn't good.
I really don't get why people are whining about some stuff about it. Like the 2nd hand games, every game as of late on PS4 or Xbox360 has codes to unlock most of the games. So if you sell them you'd need to buy a new code to make it work again.
Here is the list of games that I've bought in the past year. Halo 4, Deus Ex, Witcher 2, Borderlands 2, Gears of War Judgement, XCOM Enemy Unknown. None had codes to "unlock most of the games" and only one that I know of (Borderlands 2) had any pass content DLC exclusive to new games (mechromancer.. which now I think might have been preorder DLC and not a defacto pass). As you can see, I haven't cherry picked weird japanese niche titles but rather have largely stuck to popular releases. I'm not sure where you came up with the idea that "every game as of late on PS4 or Xbox360 has codes to unlock most of the games."
LordofHats wrote: Well we know Respawns game is a Scifi shooter (possible named 'Titan'). I doubt they'll all be kinect games. I'm suspecting Respawns title, a new Halo related title, a Gears related title (maybe). There are still rumors whirling about a new Mechwarrior game in spite of MWO and I think Microsoft still owns the rights and Mech Assault made them good money.
I dunno about a Gears title, but Epic has something in the works.
For my predictions in regards to exclusives?
Dragon Age III going back to Xbox as an exclusive. BioWare had a lot of issues with Sony and Mass Effect 3, ranging from Sony dragging their feet on certifying downloadable content to the Playstation Network making it unfeasible for the "Weekend Events" that BioWare ran to be on the PS3.
A new IP from BioWare. There's been reports of something in the works; but they started surfacing in 2012. By that point in time, it would have been downright ridiculous to start developing a new property on the current generation in the eyes of BioWare and their masters at EA.
A new Halo game is a given. 343 Industries exists just for this reason.
Something from Epic. Could be a new Gears game or a new property.
There's some talk of Mass Effect going back to being an Xbox exclusive. It's pretty much a guarantee at this point that there's going to be more Mass Effect games.
I'm going to predict, however, that most of the exclusives at launch are going to be published by Microsoft. So look at who fall under Microsoft's umbrella and work from there.
Kanluwen wrote: Dragon Age III going back to Xbox as an exclusive. BioWare had a lot of issues with Sony and Mass Effect 3, ranging from Sony dragging their feet on certifying downloadable content to the Playstation Network making it unfeasible for the "Weekend Events" that BioWare ran to be on the PS3.
A new IP from BioWare. There's been reports of something in the works; but they started surfacing in 2012. By that point in time, it would have been downright ridiculous to start developing a new property on the current generation in the eyes of BioWare and their masters at EA.
A new Halo game is a given. 343 Industries exists just for this reason.
Something from Epic. Could be a new Gears game or a new property.
There's some talk of Mass Effect going back to being an Xbox exclusive. It's pretty much a guarantee at this point that there's going to be more Mass Effect games.
I'm going to predict, however, that most of the exclusives at launch are going to be published by Microsoft. So look at who fall under Microsoft's umbrella and work from there.
Well not all. Bioware is technically owned by EA and Respawns new game is published by EA as an exclusive to the One. Maybe we're beginning to see the formation of some kind of EA Microsoft team up. Most of EA's business probably does come from Xbox users this past generation. Sony and the PS3 lost a lot of ground.
Following the Xbox One event that recently finished up, the stock market has revealed that Microsoft is actually down around 0.70%, with Sony posting a rise of about 8.5%. Looking at their full numbers, Microsoft is hovering around a 34.83 a share and Sony is at roughly 22.68.
What these numbers could mean is that, after seeing everything the Xbox One has to offer, interest in the PlayStation 4 is higher than Microsoft’s new system, with investors worried about the direction Xbox One is taking.
Looks like some folk decided to invest in Sony's success this coming release season and a few backed out of Microsoft (I'm no economy mastermind but .7% doesn't seem like a significant number to me but I don't know). A rise of 8.3% on the other hand seems like a bit of a jump. E3 just might be the make it or break it moment for XBox One and PS4.
Swan-of-War wrote: I know PC gamers like to crow about "master race" but what it fails to deliver is adequate multi-seat for me and my family. It's primarily a one-person, one-screen type of gaming experiance - with all the ipods, iphones and nooks that my kids have their noses buried in, I'd rather not fire up a system that takes me even further away from interacting with people in the same room.
With a console, at least I can have friends and family over and we can enjoy the same game experiance
Why is that every pro- console owner uses this argument? It was bs 10 years ago, it is bs today.
Care to expound on this? If you know of a way I can play a simo- four-person game on my TV via a computer (ala New Super Mario Bros), please tell.
daedalus-templarius wrote: Also, the PC argument of its a single-player platform is totally valid. Couch co-op doesn't exist on PC.
It does exist, actually, but it is certainly uncommon.
Apparently uncommon enough for me to never have seen it.
Which basically leads me to believe, it basically doesn't exist. The 1 fringe case of a game that has it doesn't really 'make' the argument for me.
I like how you are saying that it is impossible to wheel your pc the living room (or move couch to office), impossible to plug a tv to a pc (even though they have been using same ports for a long time), impossible to use gamepads and impossible to play splitscreen/party games.
daedalus-templarius wrote: Also, the PC argument of its a single-player platform is totally valid. Couch co-op doesn't exist on PC.
It does exist, actually, but it is certainly uncommon.
Apparently uncommon enough for me to never have seen it.
Which basically leads me to believe, it basically doesn't exist. The 1 fringe case of a game that has it doesn't really 'make' the argument for me.
I like how you are saying that it is impossible to wheel your pc the living room (or move couch to office), impossible to plug a tv to a pc (even though they have been using same ports for a long time), impossible to use gamepads and impossible to play splitscreen/party games.
I know you get off on trolling the console gamers; but I'm starting to think you have a problem reading as well.
What PC games are there which allow you to play splitscreen on the same machine and the same account?
I like how you are saying that it is impossible to wheel your pc the living room (or move couch to office), impossible to plug a tv to a pc (even though they have been using same ports for a long time), impossible to use gamepads and impossible to play splitscreen/party games.
I didn't say any of that, actually.
I said split screen barely exists on PC, but thanks for trying to put a bunch of words in my mouth.
I could totally roll my enormous PC into my living room and hook it up to my 60" television and giant stereo system, but I use it for work and it wouldn't exactly fit easily on my tv stand. Also, a mouse and keyboard in the living room isn't something I want. For me personally, its not worth it. That isn't to say plenty of other people can't do it.
I have a monster gaming PC which I play games on... so its not like I am only approaching this from one side.
kirsanth wrote: I have played the various Worms games with multiple people on one PC.
There are a number of other turn based games that I have done the same with.
I guess those don't count as the screen does not split?
Then again it doesn't really in nsmb or smash or whatnot, right?
We'll count them. Splitscreen or shared screens; the principle of two people sharing the same screen and control device (or secondary control devices) is more what is being referred to IMO.
Kanluwen wrote: Dragon Age III going back to Xbox as an exclusive. BioWare had a lot of issues with Sony and Mass Effect 3, ranging from Sony dragging their feet on certifying downloadable content to the Playstation Network making it unfeasible for the "Weekend Events" that BioWare ran to be on the PS3. A new IP from BioWare. There's been reports of something in the works; but they started surfacing in 2012. By that point in time, it would have been downright ridiculous to start developing a new property on the current generation in the eyes of BioWare and their masters at EA. A new Halo game is a given. 343 Industries exists just for this reason. Something from Epic. Could be a new Gears game or a new property. There's some talk of Mass Effect going back to being an Xbox exclusive. It's pretty much a guarantee at this point that there's going to be more Mass Effect games.
I'm going to predict, however, that most of the exclusives at launch are going to be published by Microsoft. So look at who fall under Microsoft's umbrella and work from there.
Well not all. Bioware is technically owned by EA and Respawns new game is published by EA as an exclusive to the One. Maybe we're beginning to see the formation of some kind of EA Microsoft team up. Most of EA's business probably does come from Xbox users this past generation. Sony and the PS3 lost a lot of ground.
I am a SCEE employee. The fact is the PS3 has now sold more units than the XBox. Not by a big margin. Both machines have sold over 75 million units. The key difference is the PS3 is stronger in Europe and the XBox is stronger in the US.
That's why EA probably could afford to make Madden an XBox exclusive and FIFA a PS4 exclusive. If you can't guarantee the XBox or the PS4 will sell 150 million, and the other one nothing, you would be a stupid publisher to throw away half your potential sales. But the US/Euro divide makes a difference on some titles. I don't know but I bet US sales of Madden are 10 times the Euro sales.
As I understood the XBox EA announcement, though, the exclusivity applies only to some download content for an unspecified period of time. The other console will get it after probably three months. There were similar deals on the current generation.
Also, I'm not ever going to move my PC into my living room(or build a living room PC anytime soon), and I really don't care what games are splitscreen on it. I will play PC games at my desk, like I have for the last 20+ years.
I don't know but I bet US sales of Madden are 10 times the Euro sales
Honestly I don't even think we'd need to look it up. We can all rest with near absolute certainly that the Madden games probably sell next to nothing in Europe compared to the US market. So yeah.
I don't know but I bet US sales of Madden are 10 times the Euro sales
Honestly I don't even think we'd need to look it up. We can all rest with near absolute certainly that the Madden games probably sell next to nothing in Europe compared to the US market. So yeah.
Same goes with FIFA having higher European sales than US, one would think.
Squigsquasher wrote: They're on their 3rd console and they still haven't got the sticks in the right places...
360 controller is best, PS controllers are gross. imo :p
I completely agree. Their controller is a big factor in my (current) preference of the Xbox. Much better to use and feels significantly more solid, also.
Aye I meant console exclusive, I already own Diablo 3 on the PC. I just want the ability to kick back and play on the sofa, but more importantly the advantage of split screen play with my boys, and or Aura.
I'd buy the PS4 just for that, with the side bonus of finally getting to play Disgaea again, and being protected by any odd Koei shenanigans regarding Dynasty Warriors on the coming generation.
Morathi's Darkest Sin wrote: Aye I meant console exclusive, I already own Diablo 3 on the PC. I just want the ability to kick back and play on the sofa, but more importantly the advantage of split screen play with my boys, and or Aura.
I'd buy the PS4 just for that, with the side bonus of finally getting to play Disgaea again, and being protected by any odd Koei shenanigans regarding Dynasty Warriors on the coming generation.
To quickly go OT to reply to MDS, Diablo 3 Playstation sounds pretty cool, they've mapped a brand new dodge to the right stick, changed the enemy behaviour and changed the way the loot system works. It plays at a far faster pace and removes alot of the tedious by the numbers stuff.
I don't think i'll regret picking PS4, the multimedia stuff doesn't interest me, i am a little old fashioned when it comes to movies and social media.Tbh i've only really been using the xbox for playing singleplayer games in the last couple years. Also If i'm honest Sony is just a little more creative i think they'll have the games worth playing in the coming years and fwiw the next Elder scrolls and GTA will be on both anyway.
I think the 54% failure rate on the 360 has pretty much lost me as a Microsoft hardware customer forever regardless of the strengths or shortcomings of the console.
I have to agree with everyone that was dissatisfied with the reveal. A whole whack of multimedia and social networking features that I absolutely do not care about doesn't do a whole lot to excite me. The 15 exclusive titles is nice, but a lot of people have remarked in this thread rightly that exclusives don't push systems anymore. In fact, I'm pretty sure I've had more fun on multiplats this gen than I have on exclusive titles.
Due to my abhorrence of the PS controller, I'll probably be sticking with the X-Box.
Ouze wrote: I think the 54% failure rate on the 360 has pretty much lost me as a Microsoft hardware customer forever regardless of the strengths or shortcomings of the console.
I'm on my 7th and final 360... luckily all the repairs have only cost me $200 total due to extended warranties that renewed with each xbox repair except for the last.
Watched part of the release and was largely unimpressed. I'm particularly disappointed with the backwards compatibility and the always on internet connect/mandatory Kinect. I've amassed quite a collection of XBox games from old and new consoles, almost all of which work fine on my current 360. Also, my job has me moving around quite a bit, and I often spend quite a bit of time without internet, which would make the new XBox unplayable.
This release has convinced not to buy it, and divert my funds into building a far better PC.
I am sad though, I still remember the first XBox and the countless hours I spent on a myriad of outstanding games. Shame really, a lot of potential seemed to be wasted in favour of enhancing my TV watching experience.
Von Skyfury wrote: While I do prefer the Xbox controller, the D-Pad is really awful =(
It really is quite awful. The new one looks more solid at least.
Yea, I used to be a PS3 owner and have to say, I very much prefer the 360 controller. It has some flaws of course, but I can mostly over look them. The PS3 controller always felt skinny and kindda wonky in my hands. Although it did take me awhile to get used to the crooked joysticks.
Von Skyfury wrote: While I do prefer the Xbox controller, the D-Pad is really awful =(
It really is quite awful. The new one looks more solid at least.
Yea, I used to be a PS3 owner and have to say, I very much prefer the 360 controller. It has some flaws of course, but I can mostly over look them. The PS3 controller always felt skinny and kindda wonky in my hands. Although it did take me awhile to get used to the crooked joysticks.
Its those damn meaty ork paws of yours that are the problem!
I'm sad to say this, but I'm already just about convinced I won't be buying one of these. And I've been a diehard Xbox fan since most of my friends left it behind long ago.
Microsoft is going to have to change some of these things if their going to get me to spend the cash on it.
For some reason the american Market has always far prefered bigger controllers. Whereas Europe and japan prefer smaller more elegant ones.
The xbox sticks are better for Shooters definitely. Driving games and sports work far better on the Playsation though, well basically anything that requires tighter control, i.e smaller movements. Platformers and fixed camera games for example. The placement of the xbox sticks means it feels far more natural to do sweeping movements of the camera or crosshair as the case may be, like a mouse.
However a game like god of war where one stick is move and the other is dodge would be a nightmare on the xbox remote.
I also prefer the 'Hunkered down' placement of one's hands on the dualshock, gives you more access to all of the buttons. Often on the 360 pressing Y or the bumpers doesn't feel as instinctive to me, don't get me started on the D-pad placement, might as well pause the game!
My problem with the Playstation controller is the nasty face buttons. The various PSPs have had lovely face buttons so maybe they'll finally have good ones on the PS4.
The problem with the 'acceleration' on Playstation controllers is a whole different matter though.
Ouze wrote: I think the 54% failure rate on the 360 has pretty much lost me as a Microsoft hardware customer forever regardless of the strengths or shortcomings of the console.
I must be lucky I've never gotten the "red ring of death" that being said the power button doesn't respond as well as it used to.
No Red ring here either. And I have a launch 360. There was an article awhile back saying that less than 100 launch 360's still functioned. It made me giddy
I've had on Rrod and a general failure of the machine, just wouldn't turn on. However I felt the power pack exchange and then the extended warranty on any machine that had a Rrod went a long way in repairing that rift.
Had they done nothing I would have had a much larger issue with them.
Just waiting for E3 now, launch line up will tell me if I am having one on launch day or not.
If you can find something explicitly stating otherwise, but till then, I'll go with what little solid info we've got atm.
That's largely irrelevant, even if it's true that means that the only people that could play used games are those without an xbox live account who are offline. This is using the 360 system as an example, who says you will even be able to create an offline profile on the 1box?
as far as I understand, that is not true either.... what I read about the release notes said that the system will not require always online (ie Diablo 3) but will require an internet connection every 24 hours to be operational... and then you will have to have a code for the used game in order to play it at all..
Automatically Appended Next Post:
SilverMK2 wrote: With game installs and disc-less gaming i wonder if the disks will have some unique identifier on them the machine can recognise to prevent people just splitting the cost of a new game between them and then buying a play code for much less than the cost new...
As far as this goes, the that may not affect it, but the cost of the "play" fee may... I read an article on forbes.com that says the play fee for a "used" game might be the cost of the game brand new!
Update: There seems to be some indication that this unlock fee might actually be the full retail price of the game. That’s certainly what it sounds like from what Phil Harrison is saying here. If that’s the case, then how exactly do “used games” even exist at that point? This is only making things more opaque-- Forbes.com
If you can find something explicitly stating otherwise, but till then, I'll go with what little solid info we've got atm.
That's largely irrelevant, even if it's true that means that the only people that could play used games are those without an xbox live account who are offline. This is using the 360 system as an example, who says you will even be able to create an offline profile on the 1box?
as far as I understand, that is not true either.... what I read about the release notes said that the system will not require always online (ie Diablo 3) but will require an internet connection every 24 hours to be operational... and then you will have to have a code for the used game in order to play it at all..
Automatically Appended Next Post:
SilverMK2 wrote: With game installs and disc-less gaming i wonder if the disks will have some unique identifier on them the machine can recognise to prevent people just splitting the cost of a new game between them and then buying a play code for much less than the cost new...
As far as this goes, the that may not affect it, but the cost of the "play" fee may... I read an article on forbes.com that says the play fee for a "used" game might be the cost of the game brand new!
Update: There seems to be some indication that this unlock fee might actually be the full retail price of the game. That’s certainly what it sounds like from what Phil Harrison is saying here. If that’s the case, then how exactly do “used games” even exist at that point? This is only making things more opaque-- Forbes.com
So in short, both Nintendo and Microsoft managed to sabotage themselves. If the PS4 gets the same game coverage as the Xbox, Sony swipes the ground with its competitors.
I've refrained from posting on here for a while now because I'm so damned angry. First off I'd like to make it clear that I have no loyalties to any one console or their manufacturer. I currently have a PS3 and a Wii, and have owned several 360's over the years (mostly because they kept blowing up). But from all I've read and all I've seen about about the Xbox 'Next' (I'm not calling it the One, that's a fething stupid name), I hope it crashes and burns horribly. It's such a shame, it really is. I'd love to see some genuine competition amongst the new gen of consoles I really would. But that is just not going to happen now is it? Because no matter if the PS4 is a hunk of junk, all Sony have to do is to ensure that it's as good as the PS3 and the Xbox is finished. I'm afraid I can't include the Wii U here because it's not a 'proper' console. Oh it has it's good points I'm sure, but it just seems a little gimmicky to me.
Speaking of gimmicky, Kinect 2... Oh my fething good god and all his little angels. That thing is freaky, with it's 'always on' function and it's beady little Red Eye staring at you and yours the whole time. Never mind the actual Xbox Next. Did it ever cross the designers minds that that thing is fething ugly? It looks like a metal Battenburg cake FFS..And that's before we get to the real killers for me. Playing games from the HDD and that fething fee to unlock preowned games
First things first, the HDD is 500gb, correct? Well, throw in a few games, themes, game saves, music and movies and that thing will fill up damn quickly. And Microsoft want it to be a jack of all trades Home Entertainment System? Do me a quaver..What Microsoft have done is throw away the one advantage they had over PS3-4 and that was that the 360 was, above all else, a GAMES CONSOLE. It didnt try to replace your DVD/Blu Ray player, it didn't pretend to become your smart TV. All it did was play games. Well now, it looks like the 'Next' won't even be able to do that very well.
And perhaps the biggest bug bear is the fee to be able to play a preowned fething game! That is without doubt the most boneheaded, fethed up move I've ever seen perpetrated by a console company. So what Microsoft are saying is that if want to borrow a friends disc to play a game before I buy it that I'd have to pay the full RRP?!
Now normally I rent a game before I decide to make a purchase. It's something I've done for nearly 20 years. But should I buy an Xbox Next would this be even possible? Or would I have to pay the rental fee plus an extra fee on top of having to pay to be able to play the fething thing online?!
No, fething no Microsoft. I may have bought one of your butt ugly machines had these not been issues, but you know what? Sony gets my money this generation. And that makes me very sad indeed. I won't even look at your bumpf from E3, because for me, it's already ruined.
I just have to hope that the PS4 isn't a complete pile of cack....
I say it as one who works for them (SCEE) but the PS4 is looking pretty good.
It's as if Sony took a hard look at everything that was done wrong on PS3 -- weird architecture, crappy network facilities, complex interface, etc. -- and decided to fix it by getting a load of US and Euro people to lead the design and make it all better.
The raw specs are better than the XBox Wun, though I don't know how much difference that will make to the games.
Kilkrazy wrote: I say it as one who works for them (SCEE) but the PS4 is looking pretty good.
It's as if Sony took a hard look at everything that was done wrong on PS3 -- weird architecture, crappy network facilities, complex interface, etc. -- and decided to fix it by getting a load of US and Euro people to lead the design and make it all better.
The raw specs are better than the XBox Wun, though I don't know how much difference that will make to the games.
As someone who doesn't work at SCEE...I am under the very same impression
Kilkrazy wrote: I say it as one who works for them (SCEE) but the PS4 is looking pretty good.
It's as if Sony took a hard look at everything that was done wrong on PS3 -- weird architecture, crappy network facilities, complex interface, etc. -- and decided to fix it by getting a load of US and Euro people to lead the design and make it all better.
The raw specs are better than the XBox Wun, though I don't know how much difference that will make to the games.
I cannot tell you how glad that makes me Kilkrazy... Even though it may be a little biased
The PS3 wasn't perfect, but if Sony can improve upon it I will be a little poorer come the release..
I don't know, I for one am pretty happy the unit will just be 'sleeping' and turn on almost instantly when I say "Xbox on", considering it takes about a minute to boot right now.
This is basically exactly how all of our other devices function now...
All of the TV garbage is totally useless to me though, as long as it has netflix and Hulu I'm fine, but I'd never be searching the internet on my screen while watching TV; that's what I have a tablet for.
LordofHats wrote: No Red ring here either. And I have a launch 360. There was an article awhile back saying that less than 100 launch 360's still functioned. It made me giddy
I'm also running a launch 360. never had issue with it which is surprising considering that I left it on for a week straight once.
Oof, not looking so hot for the XBox One at this point. The only thing that has me interested is Halo TV series. And if XBL goes up any more in price, you can count me out for sure. Have they mentioned anything about possibly having internal rechargeable batteries like the PS3 controllers?
OT - I like the 360 controller, but I've always prefered the PS controllers. Everything is just uniform and I prefer the stick design/placement more. And the 360 controller has a tendency to make my carpal tunnel flare up for some reason haha.
There was a study a couple years ago about how gamers hand adjust themselves to controllers. As in their finger muscles actually alter slightly to suit the controller. It's why some people who started with one controller find the other uncomfortable.
LordofHats wrote: There was a study a couple years ago about how gamers hand adjust themselves to controllers. As in their finger muscles actually alter slightly to suit the controller. It's why some people who started with one controller find the other uncomfortable.
That honestly wouldn't surprise me. I've never owned an Xbox until I picked up my 360 last fall; just always stuck with my PS/Gamecube systems.
Ye, but I am pretty darn pissed. The info Microsoft released was the worst thing that could happen to gamers - the removal of the second hand market alone killed pretty much any interest in buying a console with such a system for me. 90% of my console games are pre-owned (bar Rockband due to the instruments) as I sure as hell won't pay 60-70€ for a video game any more.
Sigvatr wrote: Ye, but I am pretty darn pissed. The info Microsoft released was the worst thing that could happen to gamers - the removal of the second hand market alone killed pretty much any interest in buying a console with such a system for me. 90% of my console games are pre-owned (bar Rockband due to the instruments) as I sure as hell won't pay 60-70€ for a video game any more.
Why? Will you only be able to buy games electronically? Cause if not I don't see how they can stop the second-hand market.
Sigvatr wrote: Ye, but I am pretty darn pissed. The info Microsoft released was the worst thing that could happen to gamers - the removal of the second hand market alone killed pretty much any interest in buying a console with such a system for me. 90% of my console games are pre-owned (bar Rockband due to the instruments) as I sure as hell won't pay 60-70€ for a video game any more.
Why? Will you only be able to buy games electronically? Cause if not I don't see how they can stop the second-hand market.
Licenses along with their, Please don't bypass the language filter like this. Reds8n , forced 24h connect. Buy a game, it's bound to your account. Can't sell. Well, you can. If your friend plays FULL RETAIL for the game. Xbox fanboys then say "loooool steam did this forevear lololol" and that's just returded. Have a look at how Steam reacted to the lack of 2nd hand sales. Check the prices of games at steam. Full retail resale? Nope. Plus: I still have 1 account for each and every of my steam games and still sell old games I don't play anymore. Sold Assassin's Creed 3 two days ago. Paypal, trade data, confirm change etc. Tadaa.
Yeah, that kind of is a bad idea killing off the second hand market but at the same time developers and publishers don't make anything from second hand games.
I'd put money on the fact Sony and Microsoft have had a quiet word and are both intent on killing the second hand games market this generation, or at least bringing into their control/domain.
Cheesecat wrote: Yeah, that kind of is a bad idea killing off the second hand market but at the same time developers and publishers don't make anything from second hand games.
DLC.
Plus: it's just foolish to think that people who used to mainly buy used games will now suddenly start buying full retail price. Just unrealistic.
Oh yeah. I heard about those comments yesterday. Its funny actually cause its a direct reaction to what many Xbox sites are seeing. Members saying they're gonna skip the new Xbox and just get a PC. SO EA does what EA does; be stupid.
Xbox was boast about their 5 billion transitors like its some feat of daring. That's 5,000,000,000. An Nvidia 690 (just the GPU) has 7,080,000,000 and oh heavens forbid someone dual card that monstrosity. The GPU alone on a high end PC has more transitors than their entire console. The entire idea is just laughable. When someone pays $5000 for a high end gaming PC, they get a $5000 gaming PC and that takes dumps on just about anything else bar a super computer.
Honestly the death of used games is probably one of the best things that can happen for PC. Even if the PC doesn't have a used games market, the fact consoles no longer have one kills one of their market advantages. Game Stop played a huge roll in the console explosion ten years ago and used games were a huge part of that.
First things first, it's the "Xbone", if M$ leave that one open they're gonna get it both barrels (and who doesn't love a dick joke?).
Honestly, RRoD (two dead, third hasn't been switched on in over a year now) was enough to make me think twice about any future console from M$ and after this presentation (this new "TV" thing they're on about sounds good, it might be the next big thing) I'm looking at $ony to see if they can mess up badly enough to lose out, 'cus it'll take a train wreck of truly biblical proportions to lose to M$oft now.
Cheesecat wrote: Yeah, that kind of is a bad idea killing off the second hand market but at the same time developers and publishers don't make anything from second hand games.
DLC.
Developers and publishers do not really "make their money back" on simply DLC purchases from people who buy used games. If it's not critical DLC (like EA's online passes for multiplayer on popular games), there's no guarantee people will buy it.
That's ignoring what it actually takes to get DLC made ready for release; which is around $2000 USD for first round certification, and $2000 each time that it has to go through certification if something was royally boned. That's ignoring the time of the developers and the time needed for a release slot, etc.
Yeah. It's going to come down to the games being a very much deciding factor; with just how much "wow" Microsoft can impress upon people in regards to the Xbox One and its capabilities.
I'm locked in for an Xbox; but most of that comes from the fact that the people I play with regularly are locked in for an Xbox as well.
I'd imagine I am not the only person who is making a similar decision...which is why, IMO, Microsoft announced that your Gamertag would carry over.
I have no desire to get either. I'm coming back to rejoin the PC Master Race after years in the wilderness. My PC stopped being able to play new release games in 2007, so this is a much awaited resurrection.
Besides, I've got like 8 PS3 games (including all the Assassin Creed games) that I've never even played, so it's not like a need another console.
Battlefield 4 is gonna be a big draw. I know Grey_Death is planning on getting an Xbox One at launch just for BF4, and I'm following suit so the Javelin shenanigans can continue.
Developers and publishers do not really "make their money back" on simply DLC purchases from people who buy used games. If it's not critical DLC (like EA's online passes for multiplayer on popular games), there's no guarantee people will buy it.
That's ignoring what it actually takes to get DLC made ready for release; which is around $2000 USD for first round certification, and $2000 each time that it has to go through certification if something was royally boned. That's ignoring the time of the developers and the time needed for a release slot, etc.
I do not disagree. My point is that the money they earn with DLC is more than what they'd get out of your average 2nd hand customer that is now forced to pay retail for a game: 0$.
Automatically Appended Next Post:
Kanluwen wrote: Battlefield 4 is gonna be a big draw. I know Grey_Death is planning on getting an Xbox One at launch just for BF4.
Developers and publishers do not really "make their money back" on simply DLC purchases from people who buy used games. If it's not critical DLC (like EA's online passes for multiplayer on popular games), there's no guarantee people will buy it.
That's ignoring what it actually takes to get DLC made ready for release; which is around $2000 USD for first round certification, and $2000 each time that it has to go through certification if something was royally boned. That's ignoring the time of the developers and the time needed for a release slot, etc.
I do not disagree. My point is that the money they earn with DLC is more than what they'd get out of your average 2nd hand customer that is now forced to pay retail for a game: 0$.
Truth be told; they don't get money out of your average 2nd hand customer anyways. Your "average second hand customer" comes into a shop with a stack of used games and relies upon store credit for their purchases.
At least that's how it is here in the US when you look at GameStop.
The logic that publishers have used to attack the second hand market is pretty bad and in many ways in ignorance of consumer psychology.
That said, this move is likely to drum up some new sales, at least at first. The increasing animosity held by the typical game consumer against the mega publishers has been growing for years. This will likely increase it further.
LordofHats wrote: The logic that publishers have used to attack the second hand market is pretty bad and in many ways in ignorance of consumer psychology.
That said, this move is likely to drum up some new sales, at least at first. The increasing animosity held by the typical game consumer against the mega publishers has been growing for years. This will likely increase it further.
It would be increased anyways, IMO, unless more things like BF4's "China Rising"/BF3's "Back to Karkand" get done.
The idea of getting the first DLC package "free" is a big draw for purchasing new.
As for Battlefield on PC. BF3 kind of screwed the pooch on that one. No one wants to run a $60 game out of a web browser. That's F2P territory. For an upfront charge people expect something more. EA has actually been screwing the pooch for FPS games on PC for awhile now even though the market is pretty wide open given the loathing held for the other mainstream shooter (CoD) on the platform. Not everyone is a fan of buying Counter Strike a forth time.
Kanluwen wrote: Battlefield 4 is gonna be a big draw. I know Grey_Death is planning on getting an Xbox One at launch just for BF4, and I'm following suit so the Javelin shenanigans can continue.
Perkustin wrote: Did anyone else notice how much of a sneaky maneuver EA pulled.
'yeah we're scrapping Online passes................'
[A low murmur of grateful voices, a couple of claps]
The consumer pressure lessens on EA. People start to hope.
May 21:
''Cos microsoft have thought of an even better money grubbing insult to the customers! HAHA EA wins again!''
I suspect it's because people realize something you apparently missed... namely that they're trading a $10 online pass for $1-500 microtransactions in most every game. They're not doing it out of the goodness of their dear little corporate hearts but simply because they've found the godzilla of cash cows.
Why so much hate in this thread? I didn't see enough details to be upset about anything very much... if anything, it's pretty exciting that it will release this year?
RiTides wrote: Why so much hate in this thread? I didn't see enough details to be upset about anything very much... if anything, it's pretty exciting that it will release this year?
You should see some other forums I visit, haha.
Looking forward to E3 and seeing all the new games for XBONE.
Funnily Microsoft has banned all media sources from calling the X Box One anything other than X Box One. No X Bone, no One, no Bone, nothing. You say the full name or you keep your mouth shut
RiTides wrote: Why so much hate in this thread? I didn't see enough details to be upset about anything very much... if anything, it's pretty exciting that it will release this year?
No hate for me but rather disappointment. I buy trade half my newly bought games in and buy others used; this console specifically is programmed to penalize that. I have (despite trading in games) at least a dozen 360 games that I'd still like to play on occasion (as I did with original xbox titles on my 360) on the next console. I jumped in early on this console generation in part because I traded in my old 360 and peripherals to offset the cost of the new one; that can't happen this time around. The excuse of it being different architecture is bollocks to borrow a british phrase as fans build emulators for systems with completely different architectures in their spare time let alone what one of the largest tech companies is capable of. Sony did it and so did microsoft in the current generation so it's obviously possible with software emulation. It may be more profitable in their minds to simply not spend the R&D costs and rather rerelease those same games as downloadable games for additional cost but that certainly isn't a consumer friendly choice. I also find it very big brother to know that the kinect system is always on and watching and listening; considering microsoft can't keep their flagship OS free of viruses, I have no doubt someone out there somewhere in Russia or China (damn communists!) will develop a virus allows remote control of that function. I don't need nor want a $400 voice activated TV remote at the cost of the features above.
LordofHats wrote: Funnily Microsoft has banned all media sources from calling the X Box One anything other than X Box One. No X Bone, no One, no Bone, nothing. You say the full name or you keep your mouth shut
Pretty sure that's illegal in a lot of countries...isn't it? You can't just tell journalists what to write :/
LordofHats wrote: Funnily Microsoft has banned all media sources from calling the X Box One anything other than X Box One. No X Bone, no One, no Bone, nothing. You say the full name or you keep your mouth shut
Pretty sure that's illegal in a lot of countries...isn't it? You can't just tell journalists what to write :/
Of course you can tell journalists what to write, they're just under no obligation to listen to you.
Of course, if you start holding out details to journalists who don't follow your instructions, giving out exclusive interviews to the competition etc. you create some significant incentive for them to write what you want them to.
They can't. I believe he's referring to and embelishing the internal memo that go posted a few days ago with the premiere that instructed people in business with or working for microsoft.
Well, they're contractually obliged to shovel whatever manure M$ throws their way, and to do it with a smile while telling the world we're privileged to be on the receiving end.
Thanks for the replies, guys... personally, I'm kind of excited, though. If it's around $400, it'll probably be a no-brainer for me... I've gotten a ton of mileage out of my Xbox 360, and Xbox before that.
Sigvatr wrote: So, I just watched the livestream with commentary by videogamesawesome.com and boy...seriously. SERIOUSLY? Microsoft is a bunch of self-loving morons. Actually, that is not meant as an insult, but I think they are returded as in suffering from a mental returdation, seeing they consider watching TV *challenging*. That would also explain some of the completely stupid decisions they made and would also explain the reeeeeeeeally bad design the XBox Donegot, making it look like two pieces of plastic glued together by a blind monkey with one arm.
Man, I used to like the Xbox 360 but Microsoft really decided to completely poop on their new release and smear their feces over their user's faces.
RiTides wrote: Why so much hate in this thread? I didn't see enough details to be upset about anything very much... if anything, it's pretty exciting that it will release this year?
It's kinda sad that you immediately assume that all criticism is nothing but "hate". Personally I have no hate. It's more laughter. I'm enjoying how terrible this is.
RiTides wrote: Why so much hate in this thread? I didn't see enough details to be upset about anything very much... if anything, it's pretty exciting that it will release this year?
It's kinda sad that you immediately assume that all criticism is nothing but "hate". Personally I have no hate. It's more laughter. I'm enjoying how terrible this is.
You might have constructive criticisms; but there are a few well-known PC trolls who do nothing but post in console threads trying to stir the pot while claiming that "the console fanboys" do so.
In all fairness Steve the reaction has been overwhelmingly negative thus far. As I said earlier, it could all turn around in a blink at E3 if they show the games we are all hoping for, but for now, Dakka is merely a reflection of what is going on everywhere...
I should have said "Why all the hate Everywhere?" Hadn't read enough to know why, but I knew it wasn't just Dakka. Anyway, I'm still excited for a new console... whether it's a PS4 or Xbox One
MajorTom11 wrote: In all fairness Steve the reaction has been overwhelmingly negative thus far. As I said earlier, it could all turn around in a blink at E3 if they show the games we are all hoping for, but for now, Dakka is merely a reflection of what is going on everywhere...
Overwhelmingly negative from core gamers that post on forums.
Every casual gamer I know, especially the ones that like sports, love it.
Its hit one of those top gift/want things on Amazon already.
Mr. and Mrs. Little Timmy won't like it much when their kids new X-Box suddenly stops working after 24 hours 'cause they haven't checked in with the Microsoft Central Server.
H.B.M.C. wrote: Mr. and Mrs. Little Timmy won't like it much when their kids new X-Box suddenly stops working after 24 hours 'cause they haven't checked in with the Microsoft Central Server.
We don't have all the details in regard to this yet; but I would not be surprised at all if it has an option to "check in" while the console is off.
You can already queue up downloads from Xbox.com for your Xbox while it is off.
Thing is, most people on this world are tech illiterate, and I'm pretty sure "Why do I have to connect it? My son just wants to play the game I bought him!" will become the new hell Gamestop and EB employees have to deal with.
"Ma'am, may I suggest you return your One and get a PS4 instead. No need for the internet. You just turn it on and play."
H.B.M.C. wrote: Thing is, most people on this world are tech illiterate, and I'm pretty sure "Why do I have to connect it? My son just wants to play the game I bought him!" will become the new hell Gamestop and EB employees have to deal with.
I cannot say I will take pity on them.
"Ma'am, may I suggest you return your One and get a PS4 instead. No need for the internet. You just turn it on and play."
Heh.
I would be very surprised if the PS4 does not have something similar but has had it remain as yet unannounced.
On the Xbox Telescreen front, I found this article from last year, about Microsoft patenting the ability to charge you more money to watch TV if there are more people in the room, or refuse to play a movie if there are too many people watching.
H.B.M.C. wrote: "Ma'am, may I suggest you return your One and get a PS4 instead. No need for the internet. You just turn it on and play."
Heh.
I would be very surprised if the PS4 does not have something similar but has had it remain as yet unannounced.
Maybe they're smarter than that. Maybe when Microsoft blows off their own feet with a shotgun, they'll be smart enough to not scrabble for their own chance to do the same.
This... Here's hoping that someone at Sony is paying attention to forums and chatrooms and microsofts stocks and realizes that something about their release announcement was not clicking with gamers, figures out what it was and decides to fix it for PS4... or even Microsoft does.... lol
I would be very surprised if the PS4 does not have something similar but has had it remain as yet unannounced.
Sony has specifically come out and said they will not be including such a feature.
Stemming fears of the always-online requirement still rumored strongly for the next Xbox, a Sony PR rep confirmed to Kotaku that: "PS4 games will be playable without an Internet connection."
I'm still hearing from at least one very good source who hasn't failed me yet that the next Xbox, codenamed Durango, will require an online connection, though that source isn't sure whether the console would tolerate spotty, dropped connections.
In an interview with Eurogamer at yesterday's big PS4 unveiling in New York, Sony's head of worldwide game studios, Shuhei Yoshida said, of PS4 gaming, "Oh yes, yes, you can go offline totally. Social is big for us, but we understand there are some people who are anti-social! So if you don't want to connect to anyone else, you can do that."
Related
Sony Announces The PlayStation 4, Coming This Holiday Season
After months and years of rumors, the PlayStation 4 has finally been revealed. It'll be out this holiday season. Read…
Sony is hoping that you would keep your machine online, though, so they can keep quietly patching games, updating games, sending games to you and all sorts of other stuff. This is a company, mind you, that painted a vision yesterday of a "psychic" online store that would learn your tastes and have the next game you might want to buy already downloaded to your machine before you even knew it existed—just waiting for you to click to pay.
Note: Last year, when we reported the PS4's codename—Orbis—we also reported that, while there probably wouldn't be an always-online connection for PS4, that we were hearing that users would need to register their games online. We're following up with Sony to see if that is at all part of the current PS4 plan. Even if it had been, things can change and we're trying to keep you as up to date as we can.
Related
The Next PlayStation is Called Orbis, Sources Say. Here are the Details.
While the official reveal of Sony's next home console could still be months away, if not longer, Kotaku has today learned some important details … Read…
UPDATE: More relief... At a roundtable this morning, Sony's game studios chief, Shuhei Yoshida, told reporters that any requirement for users to register a game online in order to play it would be left to game publishers. Sony won't require that.
The running rumor mill is that everything that pisses some people off about the XBone (barring its awesome new nick name) will not be on the PS4.
"Microsoft has predicted up to 1 billion sales of its Xbox One."
That was the very first line.
Also:
"We think you can go broader than a game console, that's our aim, and you can go from 400 million to potentially upwards of a billion units. That's how we're thinking of the Xbox [One] opportunity as we go forward."
And it's absurd. Someone doesn't pay attention to their own sales data. Sony's PS4 has a better chance of hitting that mark simply by catering to the Asian market and ignoring the others.
"Microsoft has predicted up to 1 billion sales of its Xbox One."
That was the very first line.
Do me a favor.
Go back. Actually read the article. You'll see that it does not EVER say "Microsoft has predicted up to 1 billion sales of its Xbox One".
I've posted exactly what it reads. It never once uses the words "1 billion" and "Xbox One" in the same sentence. It states NEXT GENERATION CONSOLES--which is both the Xbox One and the PS4.
"We think you can go broader than a game console, that's our aim, and you can go from 400 million to potentially upwards of a billion units. That's how we're thinking of the Xbox [One] opportunity as we go forward."
As much as I've enjoyed my 360 and acknowledge that it was absolutely the right decision for me, I do feel the need to point out that MS needs to actually get to that 400 million before that goal is even applicable.
Kan is right. The 360 has only sold 77 million units, but you throw in Wii sales and PS4 sales and you get about 300 million as a total for the generation. Microsoft is saying they think the new gen can break a billion.
It still a stupid statement cause its not gonna happen but that is way less stupid than when I first read that XD.
CthuluIsSpy wrote: I direct you to the second quote I posted. That implies they think they can.
And I direct you to actually start quoting things in context, not just when they support your assertions.
"Every generation, as you've probably heard, has grown approximately 30%," he said. "So this generation is about 300 million units. Most industry experts think the next generation will get upwards of about 400 million units. That's if it's a game console, over the next decade.
"We think you can go broader than a game console, that's our aim, and you can go from 400 million to potentially upwards of a billion units. That's how we're thinking of the Xbox opportunity as we go forward."
Those numbers are NOT for the Xbox One.
Actually read an article before commenting. It's interesting to note as well that the ACTUAL article title and address (not the one that Sigvatr posted, which redirects to the actual title/URL) is "microsoft-predicts-1-billion-next-generation-console-sales", not "microsoft-predicts-1-billion-xbox-one-sales".
So Digital Spy knows their post was bull. They're just using it as an excuse to ramp up hits with a sensationalist angle and banking on the fact that people will not actually read the article.
No way they will hit that when a 10 year console generation failed to break even half of that.
They're not saying it WILL. They are saying that the current predictions of upwards of 400 million for the next generation are only for "pure game consoles".
Microsoft is predicting that the next generation will exceed that, perhaps to the exceeding 1 billion mark, because of the fact the consoles are not going to be "purely game consoles".
Microsoft is predicting that the next generation will exceed that, perhaps to the exceeding 1 billion mark, because of the fact the consoles are not going to be "purely game consoles".
It's still stupid. They will never sell that many systems. That's a 333% increase in market sales. It's absurd to ever think for one second they can be that successful especially coming out of a console generation that saw the industy's first decline in profits in nearly 20 years.
Besides, only reason for me to consider buying a next gen console at any point now is because of my ever lasting addiction to Armored Core. But seeing as they still have a game in the works for the 360 it probably won't be for atleast 2-3 years untill that comes around. By that time it'll probably be down by enough. And since AC is a multiplatform series at this point I'll just look at killer apps to see what I get. Though I do like the 360 controller... PS controllers can suck it.
Perhaps they're anticipating an even more persistent and vicious RROD, necessitating more frequent replacement of your console. I know I was responsible for 1 replacement and 2 new 360 purchases. If the new consoles needs to be replaced twice as often, it could certainly 'boost' sales.
Kanluwen wrote: [Your "average second hand customer" comes into a shop with a stack of used games and relies upon store credit for their purchases.
Where did they get that big stack of games to trade in from though Kan?
I have about 80-90 games for the 360, about 70-80% of which were bought second hand; I don't think I have traded in a single game for credit before. Though clearly one story =/= data
What is the deal with people flipping out with this 'always on' thing? Literally every device I own is 'always on' and connected to the internet now.
I just don't see the big deal.
Also, according to MS like 5% of users actually 'use' backwards compatibility. I know I barely played any xbox games on my 360 once it came out. Same with Nintendos of old. I'll just keep my 360 out on my tv stand for a while...
daedalus-templarius wrote: What is the deal with people flipping out with this 'always on' thing? Literally every device I own is 'always on' and connected to the internet now.
Some of us don't have a mountain of wall jacks. This will probably kill any hope for the XBone outside of the US and Europe as well as most third world countries don't have the internet reliability to maintain this (Microsoft might not care because they've never done well in those markets anyway and that's arguably why Sony isn't doing it because they do very well in those markets). EDIT: There's a reason most pirating of PC games happens in Asia and Eastern Europe and there's a reason its been increasing in recent years.
There's also the issue of having the ability to play a game if the internet is taken out randomly in the middle of the day by no fault of ones own (glares at Comcast). And frankly some people don't like a corporation dictating to them the terms under which they may use a product they paid for. Most people practically, are unlikely to have an issue with always online. That doesn't mean they like the idea (nor does it make the idea right).
daedalus-templarius wrote: What is the deal with people flipping out with this 'always on' thing? Literally every device I own is 'always on' and connected to the internet now.
Some of us don't have a mountain of wall jacks. This will probably kill any hope for the XBone outside of the US and Europe as well as most third world countries don't have the internet reliability to maintain this (Microsoft might not care because they've never done well in those markets anyway and that's arguably why Sony isn't doing it because they do very well in those markets).
There's also the issue of having the ability to play a game if the internet is taken out randomly in the middle of the day by no fault of ones own (glares at Comcast). And frankly some people don't like a corporation dictating to them the terms under which they may use a product they paid for. Most people practically, are unlikely to have an issue with always online. That doesn't mean they like the idea (nor does it make the idea right).
Some people also have download limits that always on DRM likes to chew up.
daedalus-templarius wrote: What is the deal with people flipping out with this 'always on' thing? Literally every device I own is 'always on' and connected to the internet now.
Some of us don't have a mountain of wall jacks. This will probably kill any hope for the XBone outside of the US and Europe as well as most third world countries don't have the internet reliability to maintain this (Microsoft might not care because they've never done well in those markets anyway and that's arguably why Sony isn't doing it because they do very well in those markets).
There's also the issue of having the ability to play a game if the internet is taken out randomly in the middle of the day by no fault of ones own (glares at Comcast). And frankly some people don't like a corporation dictating to them the terms under which they may use a product they paid for. Most people practically, are unlikely to have an issue with always online. That doesn't mean they like the idea (nor does it make the idea right).
Wireless?
Apparently the 24 hour check-in is still 'under consideration', and imo it is far too often, not necessarily for me, but I can see plenty of people having issues with it. I'm not sure what the check-in is for Steam, but I think its only when you start up the game.
I can't wait to perform for the kinect. (not to mention in its powered down state, its literally only listening for the words 'xbox on')
Some of us don't like spending money frivolously. Even if its a small amount (and wireless is a security nightmare for those of us paranoid about network security).
Yeah. Steam only has a first time install check.
Though I would like to address:
Just because something has been done to PC games for years doesn't mean it's acceptable. I and many other PC gamers are genuinely frustrated with the way we get treated on the platform. I like Steam. Love it even. But that doesn't mean we should have to put up with some of the crap we've been handed and that doesn't make it right. A lot of people reply to 'always online' XBone with "So what? PC has the same thing." PC also has a very angry consumer base that has been treated like crap for a very long time. Some people care a lot about it, some people don't. Just because it's become 'standard' and just because some people are willing to live with it doesn't make it okay.
It's like being treated like a child. "You may use our product, but only where we can see you." The entire concept of 'Always Online' is based in the predetermined notion that the consumer will do something nefarious if the producer isn't watching them to make sure they don't. It is insulting.
Well how else will they determine if your legally bought copy of a game suddenly turns into an illegal one if they don't check every 24hrs?
Plus, you don't use wireless for online gaming, not if you care at all about ping/lag.
It's true enough that for virtually every item in my house with the capability, "online" and "on" are interchangeable, but most of them aren't conducting constant multiplayer matchmaking in the background on the off chance that I might want to play, I can control what and how they connect and what they download. I pay for unlimited download, but I still have a godawful fair use policy shoved down my throat and my speed is throttled during peak times, like when I might want to use it. Frankly, any constant checking is an invasion of privacy too far for me, if the PS4 implements something similar, I may just skip this generation entirely (and emulate it in 12 months when my PC can laugh at the system requirements to do so).
It's like being treated like a child. "You may use our product, but only where we can see you." The entire concept of 'Always Online' is based in the predetermined notion that the consumer will do something nefarious if the producer isn't watching them to make sure they don't. It is insulting.
I see it more of a convenience thing, but I guess it can be construed that way as well.
I just want to be able to use my Xbox if I was working at a summer camp or my internet went out for a few days.
Always checking in every 24 hrs would make that impossible. Also, what about all the soldiers overseas who play games on their days off? The Xbox done would be nothing more than a fancy paperweight to them.
Not every country is America or South Korea. Not every country has reliable Internet connections, let alone reliable wireless Internet connections.
My PS3 is connected to my router via 6 foot Ethernet cable I trail across my entire living room because the router sits on one side of the room and the PS3 sits (naturally) near my TV. I unplug it when I don't intend to use the Internet connection, and I should never need to plug it in to play single-player games.
daedalus-templarius wrote: What is the deal with people flipping out with this 'always on' thing? Literally every device I own is 'always on' and connected to the internet now.
I just don't see the big deal.
Also, according to MS like 5% of users actually 'use' backwards compatibility. I know I barely played any xbox games on my 360 once it came out. Same with Nintendos of old. I'll just keep my 360 out on my tv stand for a while...
It bugs me how everyone seems to assumes that high speed internet is available everywhere.
Well its two weeks Tuesday till I'll be able to judge whether I'll be getting one or the other, or both on launch day. E3 is going to be the biggest event in years.
daedalus-templarius wrote: What is the deal with people flipping out with this 'always on' thing? Literally every device I own is 'always on' and connected to the internet now.
I just don't see the big deal.
Also, according to MS like 5% of users actually 'use' backwards compatibility. I know I barely played any xbox games on my 360 once it came out. Same with Nintendos of old. I'll just keep my 360 out on my tv stand for a while...
It bugs me how everyone seems to assumes that high speed internet is available everywhere.
This, Until very recently I couldn't do anything that required heavy internet. Hell first time I installed Steam I had to leave the computer on for three days straight. Not all internet is crystal clear.
"Always on" would get on my nerves in this regard because even my 360 has trouble staying connected for over an hour and a half sometimes. I absolutely hate System updates. They're a whole day affair to deal with
We have a similar thing here.. best download speed I get is between 30 and 50 Kbps.. but I just leave it on and go do some modelling or painting. Its annoying but I know that's where I am at the moment.
Morathi's Darkest Sin wrote: We have a similar thing here.. best download speed I get is between 30 and 50 Kbps.. but I just leave it on and go do some modelling or painting. Its annoying but I know that's where I am at the moment.
Yeah I do that too, but mine has an annoying tendency to drop the connection entirely. Its hard to split my mind between painting and babysitting a computer...
To me, backwards compatibility is massively important, on every console I use. I admit that I've never owned an Xbox, and may not fit their target demographic, but I use backwards compatibility on my Nintendo handhelds almost more than I use the new games, and I do likewise on the one static console I own.
Not everyone in the US has constant connection. I can only use so much data. I can't even download most of my steam updates because of large file sizes.
Even places where high speed Internet is available there's still usually old people there like my Dad. He doesn't know nothing about no interwebz and he don't want to know. I don't think he's going to buy the fact you need an Internet connection to play a game by yourself. All he knows is the Xbox is a magical mystery box that let's him play thousands of hours of Oblivion and Skyrim. It's not for fancy new fangled internetting.
Not every country is America or South Korea. Not every country has reliable Internet connections, let alone reliable wireless Internet connections.
My PS3 is connected to my router via 6 foot Ethernet cable I trail across my entire living room because the router sits on one side of the room and the PS3 sits (naturally) near my TV. I unplug it when I don't intend to use the Internet connection, and I should never need to plug it in to play single-player games.
The wireless I was only referring to was local, as in connecting to my wireless router, that then connects to the wall-jack. I only pointed that out because LordofHats pointed out needing a mountain of wall-jacks.
However, all of my devices are connected to the internet through said wireless router. Always on shouldn't be a necessity, it would be better as a feature you can decide to use. The check-in seems particularly draconian, and I hope it changes.
LordofHats wrote: No Red ring here either. And I have a launch 360. There was an article awhile back saying that less than 100 launch 360's still functioned. It made me giddy
Im sure thats a bit of a stretch TBH. The Giant has a launch 360 and it runs just fine as well. But Im sure that number is pretty damn small, because I had a launch 360 and it RROD in under a month. Thats when I swapped to PS3 for so many years. Sometimes I honestly regret going 360
DoctorZombie wrote: Does it seem that we even need a new generation, because I don't think we need it.
That's like asking why would a PC ever need a new graphics card. The answer is that no one really needs it but publishers and developers want to make bigger fancier games and that means they need bigger fancier hardware.
And of course, everyone likes having a new toy to tout about to their friends
DoctorZombie wrote: Does it seem that we even need a new generation, because I don't think we need it.
Definitely, that hardware is ancient now. I'm really astonished on how good things can look on it as it is, because it really shouldn't even be possible.
DoctorZombie wrote: The Xbox One represents the current corporate shenanigans of the current set of systems up to eleven.
That's an interesting point. The XBone does seem to be the end result of people attempting to make a device that controls how we use it, rather than giving us a device that we interface with at our own speed.
XBone requires you to "check in" to a server, even when you don't want to be online, and has a device that is constantly watching you.
PS4 has a 'share' button that you can completely ignore if you want to.
I'll still likely want the Xbox for the larger multiplayer community / better multiplayer setup. I'm fine paying for Live, just like I do now, to get that...
DoctorZombie wrote: The Xbox One represents the current corporate shenanigans of the current set of systems up to eleven.
That's an interesting point. The XBone does seem to be the end result of people attempting to make a device that controls how we use it, rather than giving us a device that we interface with at our own speed.
XBone requires you to "check in" to a server, even when you don't want to be online, and has a device that is constantly watching you.
PS4 has a 'share' button that you can completely ignore if you want to.
I know which I prefer...
MS is basically saying: "You don't own these games or even this console. You own a license to this console and the games."
And that's been the standard practice for software since time immemorial.
No it hasn't. It's been Mircrosofts practice since the mid-90's but video game publishers started doing it about six years ago. It in itself isn't really a problem, but the way the companies use it to gouge customers is pretty douchy.
Cant say whether this has been addressed already but i am getting worried that this generation will be the first one to have Performance issues, ironic as it may be.
I mean how can you have skype, telly, cloud access and a game running without the cpu (or apu/gpu/whatever) taking a massive hit and the framerate Tanking? Will this be the first generation of consoles with graphics settings? I think the ps4 will fair better in this regard as it didn't mention 3 OS' running at the same time and having all the apps 'snapped' on one screen.
Part of PC culture is looking through your task manager and disabling pointless stuff to make sure you're getting the most out of your PC for the task at hand. It's tedious and something i don't miss when i'm on the console, getting consistent performance (as long as the game's well optimised of course). Naturally i seriously doubt you'll be able to disable any of the software on the Xbone to ensure smooth gaming performance.
For an example look at 2011's Battlefield 3(PC) and Origin. Initially (not sure if they sorted it) Both the Origin client and BF3's 'battlelog' app had to be running to play the game. I read many complaints from people with absolutely beastly PCs that they couldn't play the game at high specs because Origin and battlelog were munching on their memory.
Always online? Sure I'll let it use up all of my precious bandwidth every month.
Not everyone has access to cheap unlimited broadband, I have 80gb of downloads a month to be shared among 4 people. The speed is abysmal and wireless is unreliable. As it stands I don't normally play console games but my sister does use our 360 a lot and the big advantage had always been that she can just pop a game in and play it while I have to sacrifice goats to telecom to get an internet connection or just play offline.
Steam at least doesn't freak out if you lack a connection, you just go into offline mode, and you can stay there for days.
Any advantage that the xbox had has been squandered in my opinion.
And that's been the standard practice for software since time immemorial.
Elaborate.
Ever installed any software of any kind whatsoever? Every single game, every anti-virus, office suite.
You have a very valid point if we were discussing PC history, as for PC games/apps/programs this has been a standard practice. However, when we are discussing the XBone, we should, in theory anyway, be discussing a console. And the standard operation for console games has been, pretty much since time immemorial (NES, Atari) that when you buy a game (disc, cartridge, ect) you own and are able to play that game until it breaks or the console does. Now MS wants to tell console gamers "you can only play it if we let you." Not SOP for consoles at all... and not something that many consolers will put up with. Personally, if I'm going to have to deal with all the limitations of a PC, I may as well just go buy one! And I'll make sure it is not one that has anything MS on it... lol
Its not an attitude PC gamers have been very happy with. Not sure why so many people fall back to the "PC has always been this way therefore there's nothing wrong with it" logic.
Oh, I don't think there is nothing wrong with it. I think it is total crapola that PCs have had to deal with this whole concept for so long, but up until now, consoles have been a safe haven from this type of facsism... that is all I meant
Whelp suffice to say I was unimpressed, as were the Japanese people I was hanging out with, needless to say they were all Sony fanboys so it:s not like it was hard to get a negative reaction out of that crowd but still... I:m back to PCs its looking like.
I hope Microsoft is reading things like this and is realizing how bad they are planing to screw the pooch on this one. I know better than to hold out to much hope on that one however.
And that's been the standard practice for software since time immemorial.
Elaborate.
Ever installed any software of any kind whatsoever? Every single game, every anti-virus, office suite.
Those are one-time activations and do not require me to be online every 24h. Steam got an Offline Mode. And PC. Never had to activate my 3DS / Xbox 360 games. Plus: all of the above can easily be traded / sold.
LordofHats wrote: Its not an attitude PC gamers have been very happy with. Not sure why so many people fall back to the "PC has always been this way therefore there's nothing wrong with it" logic.
Because PC gaming is awesome. So what if you don't own the rights to software? I have plenty of other stuff that's way more important. Warhammer, money, sex etc
LordofHats wrote: Its not an attitude PC gamers have been very happy with. Not sure why so many people fall back to the "PC has always been this way therefore there's nothing wrong with it" logic.
Because PC gaming is awesome. So what if you don't own the rights to software? I have plenty of other stuff that's way more important. Warhammer, money, sex etc
LordofHats wrote: Its not an attitude PC gamers have been very happy with. Not sure why so many people fall back to the "PC has always been this way therefore there's nothing wrong with it" logic.
Because PC gaming is awesome. So what if you don't own the rights to software? I have plenty of other stuff that's way more important. Warhammer, money, sex etc
RiTides wrote: Personally, I think a lot of the outrage is a bit funny, since Many of you will likely get an Xbox One, anyway . I've seen this before...
I think I'll manage. $400 bucks to spend on something else I can rage about
But of course welcome to my life dealing with the abomination that is CoD, Acti-Blizz, and Ubisoft, and the entire gaming industry in general. People bitch and moan and then they fork up their cash anyway. Sadest part is that so many games are so fun and ruined by stupid gak that makes playing them a pain in the butt.
My gf and me are interested in getting a new console if it's a console / home entertainment hybrid, thus we're looking forward to further info on the PS4...Microsoft is out of the equation now. Any info on the steambox?
Morathi's Darkest Sin wrote: As to xboxone, I'm getting one, its the only place I can play Halo, thus I am there.
The only literal thing I am waiting on is launch day line up, as that dictates if I get one on day one or not.
Yeah, I'm pretty much here . Although, Destiny may replace Halo for me... still to be determined, but that would allow me to use a different platform. But as I doubt the PS4 multiplayer interface will rival Xbox Live, and as I pretty much only do multiplayer, it's hard to imagine that the PS4 would be a better fit for what I like to play than the Xbox One would.
LordofHats wrote: Steambox is (thus far) appearing to look like a small purpose built PC that can be hooked up to your TV.
Yep, knew that. Interested in it as we exclusively buy games at Steam anyway now with your proxied US account to save a LOT of money. If it'd allow you to use Netflix too...take our money!
Well the idea behind the Steam Box is to take advantage of 'Living Room PCs.' Small cheap computers that can be hooked up and used as a home entertainment system. The Steambox is simply one with the power to play video games (EDIT: And its not exclusively made by valve, it could be any living room PC with the power to do so). it can still function like other PC's and can access the internet (theoretically).
While its still way too early for a definitive decision, I may just give up on the "next generation" of gaming and keep chugging along on my 360 till it inevitably burns out (and I won't be getting an 8th one). The anti-used game policy, lack of indie support, always spying kinect, disabling games due to internet requirements, and especially lack of backward compatibity has largely deflated my interest in the xbone. My unfamiliarity with the PS2-4 controller and lack of titles for that system makes it unlikely I'll switch barring some other glaring difference to make up for it. I don't have nor plan to get a gaming capable computer either (vassal is the most advanced game I've played on either of my laptops in the past almost two years).
That said, most of the problems I have with the xbone are readily fixable in the next 6 months. Used game support? Easy to fix. Backward compatibility? Thousands of software engineers at microsoft can make an emulator if teams of a half dozen fan programmers can do stuff like that for older systems in their spare time. Forced kinect and always on can be software disabled as a setting. Allowing developers to use the cloud as an option instead of a mandatory not-DRM-but-really-DRM requirement is an easy policy change. I'm not asking to somehow use netflix without a working internet connection but rather that a single player game work offline. It's not too late for microsoft to fix the above issues I have but I doubt they will. It seems like every generation has an inflated head big ego console (sony this gen, nintendo last gen, microsoft coming up next).
LordofHats wrote: Its not an attitude PC gamers have been very happy with. Not sure why so many people fall back to the "PC has always been this way therefore there's nothing wrong with it" logic.
Because PC gaming is awesome. So what if you don't own the rights to software? I have plenty of other stuff that's way more important. Warhammer, money, sex etc
