Not a huge gamer. I do have a ps3 and I just play mainly sports games. I basically bought it so I can play The Show. Im glad that the PS4 is cheaper and looks to be better. Not sure if I'll purchase one, but the info is good to know. Thanks for sharing.
OT: Sony trolled Microsoft HARD last night(video)
The Show is the best and most realistic sports game I have ever played.
Avoiding restating the obvious - but you DO mean you ordered a PS4 right??? /s
When I won my fantasy football league(yeah, cool story bro) I had made it clear all season that any winnings would be earmarked for the next gen console of choice. I'll likely still get an earful when it arrives...But she can't say she wasn't warned.
My FF League Winnings this past year (double cool story bro!) went to buying my "kids" an XBox...just like with buying kids pets, the Xbox became "mine" shortly thereafter. Guess I'll have to win again this fall to get the PS4 for the "kids" for Xmas this year. LOL
I wonder if the PS4 will have a competitive number of titles on their platform compares to Xbox One. I hated going to the store back in the days when Xbox had 10 titles to PS3's 1.
That's not really true anymore. Most titles are made for both Xbox and PS3 lately. Xbox just has more exclusive titles than PS3 so while it might look like they have way more games, that isn't really the case
Xbox came out a year before and gained the market hence the more titles in the beginning. PS then upped the anty by securing more exclusive titles along the life of both cycles. Thats one of the things xb1 has harped on is the new exclusives they have hoping it can take back that side of the market.
Right, sorry. I always figured Xbox had more, mainly because those seem to be more popular than the PS3 ones, probably because they have more users. I forgot that the two consoles came out a year apart though
Not sure if XBox really has more exclusives.
However, what they showed yesterday gave minimal interest to me. I never liked Halo, Minecraft I have on PC, and Titan Fall I will be able to get on PC. Those were the three big names.
And Sony destroyed them based on used game content, sharing, and Indy games flocking to them since Microsoft is making it fairly difficult for them.
For me I play almost exclusively with real life friends nhl, borderlands, mmos (Dont get sucked in) We all have 360's however the drm and always online is crap. I leave mine hooked up and always online but the principle is insulting.
They claim 15 exclusives in the first year but the games sony is offering is looking pretty damn solid. I think MS is in for a shock at how much people are pissed and when they decide with their wallets.
Care to explain why Indies will flock to Sony?
Xbox is order of magnitude more accessible to indie developers than Sony. PS4 definitely addresses many of the existing issues, but to say that PS4 is better for Indies is not accurate.
Indies will flock because MS publicly stated that they don't want them. They are looking at smaller companies to develop xbla games but not indies. Aside from that the authenticating process for indie developers to get through MS is supposed to be grueling and not worth the effort. One of the points Sony made that they will continue to be indie friendly
Continue to be indie friendly???
I am guessing you have no clue on how to develop console games, because PS3 could not have been worse when it came to indie support.
I don't know where you are getting your info, but EVERY developer HAS to be registered in order to develop for the platform. That is true for EVERY walled garden platforms, including Xbox, Sony, and Apple.
Stop sprouting stuff that you have no clue about.
FWIW, Game Informer had an article this month where several indie developers, including the creator of Super Meat Boy, went off on how terrible XBLA was to work with, particularly in terms of updates (costs developers $40k to release a bug fix) and promotion.
The gist was that Microsoft led the way a few years ago, but has rested on their laurels since, while Sony and Nintendo have been making up ground, and that Sony seems pretty serious about making PS4 attractive to smaller developers.
You're right I have never developed, nor coded i'm just someone that enjoys gaming. However with xbox 1 discontinuing their XBLA in favor of letting all games stand on their own online and this article indie games companies aren't too thrilled.
These articles are confusing issues.
First, as to the bug fix fees, Xbox is a closed system with its own private network for downloads and publishing methods. The test all downloads for certainly quality checks, and they are costly, and they discourage developers from issuing poor updates with bugs, by making it costly to constantly issue patches. If you publish quality, tested code, this is not an issue.
Second, Indies can create games for not much more than sign up fees ($75 when I did it). And publishing it through Xbox Arcade is the cheapest way to get your game on a console, bar none.
The Indies are pissed because the current Xbox Arcade games are not going to be transferrable. It is a new kernel and they have to be recompiled, and probably modified to run on the new platform. That goes double for the Sony as well.
The only valid issue is the secrecy. Due to the lockdown and trying to minimize leaks, MS put Indies on the back burner. That situation will change as the platform has been formally announced. If you have been to any dev conferences MS hosts for game developers, you would know that nobody supports developers like MS in game consoles.
Again just a gamer with zero experience even thinking about how one might develop/publish a game. I hope you are right because I love indie games and currently only play on 360. I just saw a few articles/interviews with popular developers (fez, Super meat boy, etc) blasting the new xbox format/secrecy what have you.
Do you, Gameboy?
Not this dog...
Yes ps3 indie dev support was weak which is why xbla took over. However patching on xbla is a pain and added cost. However the biggest problem with xbla is that MS chooses when YOUR game releases. Having an indie title launch along side AAA titles is a joke.
Sony has made this process much more streamlined for ps4. Patching is simple and supposed to be much faster. BUT the biggest announcement is that Sony is going to let US decide when we release games. MS is not going to be so accommodating.
Also, Cell was a pain to develop for (properly). That shouldn't be the case this time around.
But with how similar the actual hardware is(both have an 8core x86 AMD processor) I wonder if porting games from one system to another might be as simple as formatting game data to a new OS(not that that's simple). Easier porting should lead to fewer exclusives.
I'm probably going to buy a Wii U once the price drops solely for the new game from Monolith Soft. Not thrilled with Wii U Mario, the new Retro game (it's just another side-scrolling Donkey Kong), Mario Kart Wii U looks awesome, as does the new Smash Bros. Other than that, I'm willing to buy a Wii U soley for the Monolith game.
PS4 is making moves! I like it!
I prefer to game 2-3 years behind the curve. So around 2016 I'll pick one of these up for $199 in a Christmas sale.
Pretty much the same here. Red Dead Redemption is awesome you guys!
Just finished the first Bioshock a bit ago. Was crazy (Subs!) just downloaded Fable 3 for free, but I think that may take way too long to play through.
I think the only games I've paid full price* for recently are the NCAA Football ones and Halo 4.
* b/c I usually get a preorder deal of $5-20 off, or include DLC.
I've been shamelessly buying up the "Game of the Year" editions that come out with all the DLC included. Easy to find for under $30 and usually a great game. Went that route with Fallout 3, Arkham Asylum, and Red Dead Redemption - still need to pick up Uncharted 3 (2 was one of my favorite games). But first I need to finish off Deus Ex: Human Revolution. 2011 PS3 games are awesome you guys, for real.
Of course, I basically never play online multiplayer because I don't play enough to be good and nothing about being slurred at by 12 year olds is appealing to me. Is probably have to rethink my strategy if multiplayer were key to me.
Here's another of my favorite games:
Quite amusing. Suddenly have more street cred.
Nice. That one does look pretty cool.
I have balked at the prices of the consoles for many years now, the fact that for only a little more I can buy a PC...I really don't care for the consoles.
This round/generation is Sony's to lose, MS has not done what they needed to, and Nintendo also did very little. I did buy a WiiU but it is for the kids, I play games on my PC or I don't play them.
I am not really a fan of either sony or MS...I seen nothing that is compelling enough to spend the amount they want you to.
I've had just about every system. I'm on the fence as to which console. I've been with 360 for the last few years and even though you pay for online its far superior i.e. private parties, cross game comms, etc) However it looks to be that ps4 is implementing the same thing with this console. I'm curious if the slight favor of ps4's specs are going to matter since if i'm not mistaken xb1 will be using cloud to overpower their specs through the future (assuming its not b.s. and I understood that correctly) The DRM and stupid rules xb1 is implementing could turn the tide if they don't figure something out soon though.
Microsoft's "power of the cloud" stuff is nonsense.
The idea that you could offload any significant processing to "the cloud" would require both a super fast internet and massive dedicated servers on the MS end.
See Sim City for the pitfalls of this approach.
Plus, you really are "leasing" your game at that point, since it becomes worthless when MS decides to stop supporting it. It would be like every Windows XP machine on Earth just refusing to boot.
Long time Xbox/Microsoft man but Sony really did everything to pull most casual gamers towards to the PS4. The idea of going up north (where we don't have internet) and not being able to play some Fifa after an afternoon of snowboarding seems ridiculous to me. Why do you need to have an internet connection to play games? I certainly will be converting to the PS4 this winter, I'm really not sure why anyone wouldn't at this point.
The fact you still need to be connected to online to even play single player is ridiculous to me.
I heard you need to login every 24 hours.
The server pings your XB1 every 24 hours. If your XB1 does not respond, you have to log in again.
Yeah it has to authenticate atleast once every 24 hours. If you don't you can still watch tv/blu ray but no games even single player. Also the big dark scuttlebutt is the Kinect will be used to see how many people you have watching a rented movie or an event. Think sports bar watching a UFC fight and if it sees more than the alloted faces then BAM busted.... Again just rumor but still scary.
I dont get the benefit/point of this rumor at all? If you have 3 instead of 2 people watching a movie you get busted? My wife has never turned on the Xbox let alone created a profile so its not like they can use facial recognition and to dissallow people.
Further, I thought they've said Kinect can be turned off, but it needs to remain "hooked" to the system where as the internet/ping system cannot ever be turned off.
Not sure of the validity of said rumor just that I got it from IGN the benefit would be not to the consumer but the companies providing it which as you can probably tell from DRM, online only, etc seems to be where MS cares the most. The new kinect can recognize multiple people at once to play opposed to two with the first model. It never turns off. You can turn off certain functions but it lies awake waiting for certain voice commands. Again just a dirty rumor that gained some traction but based on the evidence so far not too far fetched.
the benefit would be programs like Netflix for example would make recomendations based on who/how many in the room. 4 or 5 people there? Ok here is some family entertainment. 1 Person? Oh here are some action movies.
Basically targeted advertising could be better and in this early phase, gathering data to see how they can sell/charge us for things in the future will be the concern.
No no it makes perfect sense. Think of a UFC fight on pay-per-view. Let's say it's 19.95. UFC and the cable company / whoever "sells" the UFC fight to tv don't care if 6 people rather than 2 watch it at your house. They care when a bar buys the fight, and ONE HUNDRED people watch it as free riders. That's when they lose big money. I bet the bar could be set high enough not to impact most events, they could make it 15 "faces" per purchase.
That rumor is just conspiracy theory nonsense. They aren't watching you through Kinect and counting how many people watching your rented movies. Why would they care anyway? There isn't a limit on the number of people that can watch a rented movie. I could invite my entire town ower to watch a rented movie if I wanted to. The only person I'd be in trouble with would be the fire marshall.
The 24-hour internet authentication thing is true though
Microsoft actually did file a patent for that technology. They just aren't using it for the xb1. That's where the confusion is coming from.
Large companies file patents for all kinds of crap. They generally do this to protect themselves from other companies undercutting them with their OWN patents and then trying to extort money from them saying that they are infringing on their patents.
A company with the unlimited resources of Microsoft patents anything they can possibly patent, and probably stuff they should be able to as well.
I am not defending Microsoft on this rumor, but it would seem that you could just turn your Kincet, seeing as how it is just a camera sitting on the shelf. I hate this idea and this may put me off buying one for awhile to see how it actually turns out. I have a feeling Microsoft may have to change some features after all the reporters destroy them after E3.
Was skyrim. A one person role playing game. My Xbox doesn't even have Internet. I have no interest in a gaming system that wouldn't allow me to do this. I'm probably not target audience though as it will be years before I will get a new system as I still have games for my 360 and wii that I am trying to get to
Even for single-player games, like the SimCity EA fiasco. Sounds like Microsoft is here to bring the bad old days back.
The Xbox's DRM thing and the restrictions on reselling games killed it for me. I'm guessing Xbox will backpedal on the the DRM thing if PS4 interest picks up steam, but even if they do, I see their intent. I'm definitely switching back to Sony.
If I got back into gaming, I think I would have to choose the PS4. I hear alot of people don't like the direction Microsoft is going. A $100 price difference is huge! No way Xbox can keep the $500 price, can they?
But then I got a Xbox and liked that better. When the 360 came out, I got that and stuck with it because most of my friends had a 360 too. Now, though, I'm probably going to go back to the PS4. Microsoft and it's DRM and Internet requirements are terrible and I don't want to support that.
I'm a pretty big gamer these days and there's no question that PS4 is going to be a better gaming console than the Xbox. Its clear to me that Microsoft is going for something different with CrapBox1 - they appear to want it in households with no gamers which is fine but its hurting their gaming constituents.
As for me, a current PS3 gamer, I'm building my own PC. It became clear to me long ago that the best gaming experience is on PC (other than sports games, of course). Although the consoles are trying desperately to catch up and provide titles on the same kind of platform as PC (processors, RAM, video cards, etc.) they will never compete. Especially where FPS titles are concerned.
P.S. Battlefield 4 looks amazing! Coming out later this year.
Problem with the PC route is that ultimately, the games aren't that much better no matter how much cash you drop on the system. Major studio games are too expensive to not be portable to the consoles, so even though you can run crysis 3 or whatever processor hog du jour at super high resolution / frame rate / etc, the game is fundamentally the same as on the console in terms of content. You can't put anything that RELIES on super high end PC rigs to function, because the market just isn't big enough, and it's probably shrinking as consoles get better and desktops continue to go the way of the dodo except for specialized applications.
That said I actually prefer certain games on PC (FPS and RTS) and actually built a pretty respectable if not super high end gaming rig back in college, but won't be doing that again anytime soon.
I disagree with the part about the desktops going away...yes tablets and laptops are cool, but at the same time, after using a nice large monitor for years, I can't stand the tiny little displays of the tablets and laptops are only slightly better.
It may happen but I don't think it goes away soon, desktop is still soooo much more than just playing games, but the consoles <yawn> just don't do enough extra to make them worth the money.
Because it's the same reason people are getting away from cable and tv and all that. But if you can end up hooking up your device (mobile, computer, whatever) to a bigger screen, that may do away with that problem. What we're really headed towards is where your tv is your computer screen, and you control it with your remote/tablet.
Kind of already have it. It's a free app called "Smart Glass" tablets/smart phones used to control the 360. It works pretty good and allows you to search netflix and message friends easier. I like it.
Well, you may be right about that...I just need to make sure both can be done at the same time and usually someone is watching TV and someone on the PC.
My point with desktops is that you probably wouldn't own a really good one unless you have some dedicated function - be it gaming, video editing, simulation, etc.
Otherwise, if you've got a desktop it's probably a glorified Internet box.
Again, I've built a high end PC and enjoyed it. But now a $500 laptop can easily do everything that I use a PC for, and if I want to set up a big screen at my desk I can. And the cost to go from that $500 laptop to a gaming rig capable of running new titles is much more than the $400 cost of a PS4, which also would serve as my "main tv" media server / Blu Ray player / Netflix box
my PS3 is basically a BF3 machine. we should squad up sometime!
I'm also not a big gamer, but I'm shocked by what Microsoft is trying to pull here. I love my Xbox 360 but will be picking up a PS4 in the next generation. Sony seems to have their act together this time around.
When your DRM makes SONY look like a GNU crusader, you're doing it wrong.
I've never spent $60 on a game...I cannot remember the last time I bought a game in a brick-and-mortar. That was the deal breaker for me, even moreso than the extra $100 Microsoft wants. My games come used from amazon and eBay, with a little gamefly thrown in when a bunch of new titles come out. None of those things are xboxone compatible.
I find the situation very odd. It's the publishers that are pushing for this, and will control it for the Xbox. Those same publishers also develop PS4 games. Are they just going to charge extra for the PS4 games without DRM? Did they change their minds and not tell MSFT? Did Sony lie to them?
EA and certain other publishers already do this to a degree. You get a code when you buy it new that allows you to access the online portion of the game and if you buy it used you need to buy a $10 DLC code that will give you full access. This will be a pain, but I am really curious as to how Sony will get around this, or if the publishers will just push DRM themselves on PS4 owners.
Ive heard that EA is going away from the use of the codes. I guess people were getting pissed off. I think NCAA 14 might be the first one to not require a code.
I don't think Sony was being totally truthful here. Some more details:
Basically, 3rd party publishers can implement some sort of DRM that would disable games, or at least online access.
I wouldn't be surprised if the policies of the 2 consoles converged to the same thing. There's no way a compnay is going to do something different on 2 consoles unless they charge a lot more for the DRM free version.
Yeah the only thing that would make me even consider buying Xbox One is Halo 5. Other than that PS4 is the clear winner right now. I'm just so pumped that they announced Star Wars Battlefront. They finally realized how much money they were leaving on the table by not making it what with Star Wars fans and Shooter fans buying it. Hopefully they come to the same realization with Knights of the Old Republic (not the MMO bullshit).
With DICE's Frostbite engine powering this game it can't go wrong, really. The only trouble will be EA's involvement gumming things up. Regardless, its going to be awesome to see the game on advanced systems and graphics. I loved the old ones on PS2.
Ugh, I swore off Sony products after the the Sony Music Rootkit fiasco. Now I get to choose between that and a XB1 I'm basically leasing from MS where I own no rights. I was really excited to see what the next gen Xbox would do, but now it looks like I'll be going the PC route. Is it really that hard to not run a company like a villian from Bond movies?
Honestly I swore off Sony after the Betamax fiasco back in the late 80's.
xbox will still be where its at.
My tenant stole my Xbox 6 years ago and I never replaced it. Given he paid me $48,000 worth of rent over 4 years I'm cool with the trade-off.
You had an Xbox 6??
The PS4 controller is $59.99.
I think I will wait and see what happens but I plan on sticking with xbox. The ps3 was always supposed to be the better machine, better graphics, you didn't have to pay to play online, but it never really seemed better just equal. I play a lot of used games but would honestly rather give my money to the people actually making the games than some third party just trying to make money off of me like gamestop or gamefly which I use btw.
Have to pay now for PS4 to play anything other than single player. The cost is 5 a month compared to 10 for xbox live. It does cover all consoles though vita/ps3/ps4 with one membership.
Yea I did see that, it was always the argument I heard for why the ps3 was better but most people I know preferred to pay for xbox live over the free psn.
unless they raised the prices, Live has always been <$5 for the year subscription.
Try $50/60 per month
They seem to have a good comparison of features.
I have both, but really I think I only break out the XBox for those "exclusive" games. From controller to Blu-Ray to most everything I find the PS3 better. Though I admit I'm getting way behind in finding time for my gaming. I always seem to be cracking college football open late.
you cann only share a game with one friend I'm sure Microsoft will make the games cheaper...
- Naive Nelson
I started gaming with the Atari 2600, vic 20 and commodore 64 (lots of you on this website probably have never heard of those). so i have been at this a long time. I have never been an x-box fan and I'm not going to start now. The whole pay to play online thing was the precursor to what they are pulling here. They don't suck enough money out of you by charging 500 dollars for the console and 70 dollars per game, but they have to charge you to play online too? Give me a break. PS4 all the way for me.
My Atari 2600 had wood panelling.
Had an external 5.25 drive and a bitching dot matrix printer. I played text based games and wrote code to hear it play sounds.
Oh hell yeah. I remember we'd get some sort of gaming magazine each month that would have a new text based game source code for the 64. And who could forget waiting 30 minutes to print out a "Happy Birthday, Mom!" banner complete with birthday cake artwork using Print Shop?
Blast from the past right there.
Remember saving progress on a cassette tape? ;)
I thought it was the 7800 that had the paneling. I had the 2600 and was always jealous of my neighbors' 7800 (w/ faux wood panel).
I think the PS4 is better too, but Sony is requiring a PS+ account to play online with the PS4. PS+ costs $50/year.
and Sony totally PWNED Microsoft in that vid.
I have all three major game systems (PS3, XBOX 360, Wii U). Actually, we're on our third XBOX 360, since they keep breaking (RROD/DVD Drive problems)...
My personal preference is the PS3, but probably because my kid kicks my ass at every Halo game ever published...
Personally, I like the TV passthrough on the XBOX one. Considering the RAM the consoles wll have, I think that will actually prove useful for married guys like me whose wives demand attention in the form of watching crappy TV shows with them.
That said, the DRM and 24-hr authentication were just too much, i cant buy an Xbox One on principle alone. Really looking forward to Infamous, Uncharted, and Final Fantasy XIV and XV.
I'd always thought picture in picture would be really cool...till I got it. It sounds great in theory, but in practice it's just kind of annoying. Did someone forget to tell Microsoft we've already got an input/source button on our remote control? How many people who are going to buy a $500 machine are going to need a new box to give them picture in picture? How many are going to care about using one more hdmi input?
One of the cool ideas for passthrough is the ability to have your fantasy sports scores on the side while watching TV. Another use that I could see is if my friend and I are watching something on TV, we'll play a game during the commercials/halftime, so it makes it easier to monitor in that sense.
A deal breaker. What if we lose power for a week? What a pain in the ass.
I am so fucking sick of the proliferance of the word "trolled".
Maybe 6 years ago
The sad part is that it isn't even used correctly 99% of the time. Trolling used to be the act of dropping a few obviously contentious statements into a message board and watching people bitterly argue with no gain. The troller was acting like the fisherman sitting in his boat. Simply casting a statement overboard in many different places and letting people fight over it with minimal effort. Now people are "losing the game" by spending more effort trying to "troll" people than the effort people but into their arguments after being trolled. Get off my internet lawn you kids!
GDDR5, not DDR5. GDDR5 will be faster for graphics. DDR3 will be faster for general usage. Considering that Microsoft sold out on the idea of a media center, you're pretty much comparing apples and oranges.
The difference was lost on me. My only knowledge of RAM came from research when I snapped together my last desktop. G/DDR5 wasn't even an option then.
I have privacy issues with both of them. I guess ps3 is as far as I'm going for now.
That funny you say that because a lot of the games coming out this fall are going to be prepped for release on both PS3 and PS4. In the case of Battlefield 4, its going to be very interesting to see how that works. PS4 is going to support 64-man servers for BF4 but PS3 only supports 24-man servers. Its a drastically different gaming experience between the two but of course they have to make the game for both to maximize profit.
Ive wanted to play BF3 on PC to see the difference. I couldn't imagine TDM with that many people.
I think the TDM maps are extended on PC (think SqDM on PS3) but the real difference is seen in Conquest rounds. On PS3 you can run around for 20 minutes and not see anyone! That doesn't happen on PC. Many (most?) of the maps weren't made for only 24 players. I can't believe that the guys/gals at DICE feel that their design is being fully appreciated on console. But we at least got all the DLCs before everyone else on PS3, so that's something.
If you're interested in seeing some PC footage, check out rivaLxfactor or LevelCapGaming on Youtube. They have great educational stuff.
Yeah conquest can be dull at times. I'll have to check that out. Thanks for the info.
I know it is really douchey to say it, but I'm probably going PC for a few years. If you are resourceful, you can get one for the same price as an Xbox one and you can get games on the cheap from Steam.
That said, of I'm going console, I would probably choose PS4. I agree that piracy and used games are a real problem, but putting that burden on the consumers is not a good solution. Companies should be working on taking percentages from gamestop's used game sales, not charging consumers full MSRP or shutting down the system if the account has not been verified in 24 hours. And while always online would not be a problem for ME 95% of the time, I imagine that 5% would leave me pretty pissed off.
Any word on if you'll be able to play PS3 games on the PS4? That's probably the biggest hurdle for me in making the jump from 3 to 4.
The answer, AFAIK, is no. There will be no forward compatability (or whatever technical description they use).
They changed the processor architecture they use on the PS4 so true backwards compatibility won't be possible as far as popping your old PS3 discs in. However, Sony has recently announced that they plan to make some PS3 games available via streaming so all is not lost (http://www.techradar.com/news/gaming/consoles/ps4-gamers-can-stream-ps3-...).
In my eyes the 360 killed the PS3...I haven't even been paying attention about the new consoles. I have an original 360 Elite never red ringed on me or anything put a month alone on MW2 online still runs great picked up a PS3 for Xmas and was happy with it the downside is there's no party chat so you can't communicate with your friends unless your playin the same game in the same lobby. From this thread/friends/E3 nerds all sayin the PS4 is better my question is are they addressing this at all so you can have a party chat or some shit?
Party chat is an option, they rolled it out in the presentation.
PS4 will take over.
Fuck both of them. PS4 has no BC with PS3 or PS2 games......but it does have PSone.
I refuse to have 3 consoles in the back of my TV.
Emulating the Cell processor would be very difficult/annoying/expensive to do. PS2 is feasible, but people will pay to buy the IP again, so it's not worth the headache.
Internal to these companies, people realize that backward compatibility a lot of work with diminishing payoffs over the life of a console.
Gamers will bitch about it, but it isn't a good investment.
Even if Microsoft corrects the two obvious blunders (constant internet connection needed; almost impossible to share games) and the fact Sony just publicly took them to town, the PS4 has probably gained thousands and thousands of buyers from Microsoft who are in the casual gamer category
I'm not saying years down the road that I won't buy a PS4 or an xbox 1, but what can the new consoles do that a high quality gaming PC can't already do? High end gaming pc can already plam games at 1080P 3D, etc.
Consoles are cheaper than gaming pc, but games are a hell of alot cheaper on Steam. I have a Steam backlog right now, and I basically never spend more than $25 on a game I want unless I have to have it at launch. For the record, I have a PS3 which I mainly play sports games on, and an Xbox 360 which I literally only play Forza on. The only reason I bought a 360 was becasue I found a hell of a deal on a used elite still under warranty and I had won a shit ton of money playing keno the night before at the bar. I haven't played keno since then becasue I figure I'll never win that much again, lol.
I like xbox, but all the different ways they want to force you to spend more just for the privilege of using their system pisses me the fuck off. I love Dead Space and I was so mad jumping through all the hoops to play pay-for-online-only multiplayer. I had to sign up with 6 different websites with 6 different passwords to play 2 player coop online even though i was sitting in the fucking room with the my 2nd player, and my email got spammed so hard after that. Now they want to dictate to all gamers how they should be allowed to play at all. Fuck you Microsoft, I'm the fucking consumer, I tell you what I want, you cater to me, not the other way around. You don't get my money anymore.
Great post. Made my day. At this point I guess I am a bit happy I never got into online play and shit. Just me, possibly others, a console, game, tv and controller(s). Simple!
I wonder how much cheaper the PS4 will really be? I bet, in the end, the prices will probably equal out somewhat. Sony will probably charge more than MS for online features and extra controllers, etc. But it's a brilliant strategy nonethless. This will be fascinating to watch as MS will probably have to change some things on the fly here to stay competitive. I like your Sega Saturn analogy.
Not sure where you are getting your info but the new XBOX One does NOT have "the same RAM they used in their almost decade old console".
The XBox 360 has 512 MB of RAM (1/2 GB). The XBOX One will have 8GB of RAM. That is 16 times more.
Sorry I misunderstood what you were saying..
Yeah, it is possible that it is the same type of memory. That honestly isn't necessarily a terrible thing. There is so much more involved in the speed of these things then in just the exact speed of the memory, like bus speeds & caching, plus I know the XBOX has some high-speed SDRAM directly on the GPU that supposedly will factor into the overall equation as well.
So in the end, you really can't tell what the overall perf of the box is until you start pushing it with games and see what happens. But you're right--on paper the Sony memory is faster.
Here's an article on the specs:
I'm still just going to stick with my PC for most of my gaming (mods, better graphics, etc) and just use my 360 for sports games. I have no first-hand experience with Sony's online play (been told by friends that it's horrid and lonely), but I can definitively say I'm always impressed with Xbox Live's ease of use. I get the DRM stuff (and that "borrowing games" video from Sony was LOL), but it's no different from what I experience now with Steam, really. I just wouldn't want to pay $60 for the game AND have the DRM issues.
As for me, I just recently rebuilt my system. I harvested the existing case, PSU, blu-ray drive and only upgraded MB, CPU, RAM and GPU. My system was 6 years old before the upgrade and still ran Skyrim and Far Cry 3 on the same settings graphically as the Xbox 360/PS3. Now I get Ultra on everygame but Metro: Last Light for less than $500. Oh, and I forgot to mention that when upgrading, I got Steam game codes from AMD. So I got (before their release) Tomb Raider, Bioshock Infinite, Hitman: Absolution and Far Cry 3: Blood Dragon for free with my purchase. So take $200 off the price there just in games. Oh, and the MicroCenter I purchased them from added a code for Assassin's Creed III because I chose them for my purchases over Newegg or Amazon.
I have the PC hooked up to my 60" TV, so it's just like using a console anyway (and almost every game supports the use of Microsoft's 360 wireless controller with a $20 dongle), except that I can also do ANYTHING else (including watching TV/movies via MediaCenter) on it. All of the wallpapers I produce for the blog are done on the same machine that I game on.
Anyway, just my two cents. I know a lot of console gamers are timid when it comes to switching to PC, but my 360 hasn't been on since I rebuilt my PC. I'd at least look into it when the time comes to choose. If the title is going to be released on PC, you can bet that hardware companies will be putting more packages together that include them as a bonus for buying their component.
I don't play video games. I'm a grown-ass man.
If all I play is sports games which one is better?
PS3 or 360. They're still going to be supported for at least the next 2-3 years why get something new?
Microsoft addressed people in the armed forces without internet that they should just keep their 360's. This leads me to believe that they will release Halo 5 and Gears of War 5 on the 360 as well. EIther that or they were just being total condescending douchebags to people defending our country. Hard to say.
so, which is getting the NCAA CFB series?
It seems to be that Nintendo is dead in the water as well. The WiiU seems to be a flop and there just aren't many games with a WOW factor for that system anymore. Where is the next SMB? Zelda? Metroid? MarioKart?
I'd love to get a PS4, but there just aren't enough kids friendly games for my kids to play. and the WiiMotes are really simple for the kids to pick up and learn to use.
In a perfect world, Nintendo would get rights to NCAA, Star Wars and Batman games. That way my kids could play and I could as well, without having 2-3 consoles under the TV.
Mario you say? Just break out the N64 and all the Mario games. Still my favorite system