PS4 or Xbox 1

[Crimson92]

Originally Posted by Seminole

Yup, MS is really that dumb. The PS4 just took a shit all over the Xbox yesterday. No way anyone with a brain will go to the Xbox.

People said the same thing about the 360

And yes I have a brain.

[Judge]

Originally Posted by Crimson92

People said the same thing about the 360

And yes I have a brain.

With the 360 you don't have to connect to the Microsoft mothership every day (or ever) to prove you are authorized to play the game you paid for. With the 360 you actually own the games you buy and can do radical things with the disks like sell them or lend them to a friend because you own them.

Microsoft is going all in with this one. They better have a pretty damn good product coming out to justify the brave new direction they are trying to take the gaming industry in.

[Prissy]

PS4

[TK-421]

RIP Xbox One (2013-2013)

Oh and if you watch these two back to back, you might notice a difference in the crowd's reaction:

[Crimson92]

im getting both, so all the the complains people have on each system mean nothing to me.

but chances are I will spend more time on the xbone.

[MidwestGolfBum]

Will most likely get both, not at launch, mostly based on time, but will end up with both.

[My335iTT]

I have always loved Xbox and owned everything Xbox but DRM and some other shit pissed me off. PS4 for me now.

[Year's_End]

I'll be getting both eventually, X1 first followed by PS4. I've been an owner of both consoles for the past three gens.

I want to voice my opinion on the X1, since there is so much vitriol thrown at it. First off, its concept suits me (23 years old, less time for games) quite well. I love the idea of an all-in-one media device. As much as I miss my games, I only spend about 30-60 mins every other day gaming. Here's my take on the popular criticism that's going around:

1) People are complaining about the Kinect always being on and becoming an invasion of privacy, especially as recent news of the NSA's monitoring has surfaced and blown up. This has no effect on me and I can't muster up a single fuck should it be used to monitor my gaming and television habits. And that's not even considering the fact that a cell phone is a far more versatile and invasive device.

2) There's a large deal of hate directed at the new DRM policy. As someone that has an Internet connection (like the majority of people living in a developed country, especially those that have the expendable income to buy a console and the games to go with it), has rarely bought used games, and hasn't shared a game since highschool, this has zero effect on me. This might affect the small minority of consumers that somehow have the ability to spend boo-koo bucks on a console but can't afford Internet access, and it might affect the other crowd of frugal (or low-income) gamers that can't afford new games by eliminating their ability to purchase used. Plus, we have no idea how their pricing structure will work as games begin to age. They might offer sales somewhat similar to the highly-praised (and yet, almost identical) Steam service.

What doesn't make much sense to me is the requirement to check-in (even if it's just once every 24 hours) to play single-player games. It's not a problem for me, but it's a bit strange.

It sounds like Microsoft is trying to help protect developers, which is a completely logical business decision IMO. It's absurdly difficult to survive as a game developer these days thanks to increased budget requirements, increased piracy, and diminished returns from used purchases. For game pirates and used game dependants, this is an issue. I think developers will flock to the X1 because of this.

*The difficulty of surviving as a game developer is also a huge reason why big companies churn out shit sequels year after year (like COD) as opposed to creating new IPs; if it sells, don't take a risk.

(Sony's PS4 doesn't mandate DRM, but it does leave the option available to the developer)

3) I need Forza. And my girlfriend loves playing on the Kinect, so she gets something out of it as well.

I'm really tired of seeing the exaggerated hate against the X1. The PS4 is a fantastic machine as well. Different strokes for different folks, they're both great choices in the end.

[Wakka]

XB1 doesnt have good RAM, Graphics, or CPU. they missed everything real gamers actually want, and gave them everything they dont want. Sure maybe it suits you, but 90% of the people that actually buy consoles are not as fortunate as the people on this forum.

People with real money get a PC anyway.

[keepittrill]

Yeah, I think most of us are getting both, although it'll probably end up being a waste of money seeing as how I usually play once or twice a month.

[F1Venom]

I actually remember how excited I was back in 2006 about the PS3 and Resistance Fall of Man. Now I don't give a damn about games and only buy the next COD which always leaves me dissatisfied.

[MidwestGolfBum]

Originally Posted by Wakka

People with real money get a PC anyway.

I can wholeheartedly agree with this, even though I will probably end up with both systems. In large part, it's because people come to hang out at my house and they come on more than me actually playing them on my own.

[Judge]

Originally Posted by Year's_End

2) There's a large deal of hate directed at the new DRM policy. As someone that has an Internet connection (like the majority of people living in a developed country, especially those that have the expendable income to buy a console and the games to go with it), has rarely bought used games, and hasn't shared a game since highschool, this has zero effect on me. This might affect the small minority of consumers that somehow have the ability to spend boo-koo bucks on a console but can't afford Internet access, and it might affect the other crowd of frugal (or low-income) gamers that can't afford new games by eliminating their ability to purchase used.

It's the principle of DRM that's the issue, not whether people can afford the internet or not. It's the idea of having to depend on Microsoft being around forever, their servers always being reliable and you always having to maintain an internet connection just to play the thing. If any of those were to go kaput you'd have NOTHING but an nonfunctional box. What if, two years from now, Microsoft were to start charging $300 a year for their online service and the price of games went up to over $100 each? Could you opt out and still be able to access your current library?

Not saying this is remotely likely or I'd be worried but again it's the principle. I like to know that I can take my old SNES out of the closet any day and dust off some old cartridges whose developers have long been out of business and will continue to play long after Nintendo goes out of business.

[Year's_End]

Originally Posted by Judge

It's the principle of DRM that's the issue, not whether people can afford the internet or not. It's the idea of having to depend on Microsoft being around forever, their servers always being reliable and you always having to maintain an internet connection just to play the thing. If any of those were to go kaput you'd have NOTHING but an nonfunctional box. What if, two years from now, Microsoft were to start charging $300 a year for their online service and the price of games went up to over $100 each? Could you opt out and still be able to access your current library?

Not saying this is remotely likely or I'd be worried but again it's the principle. I like to know that I can take my old SNES out of the closet any day and dust off some old cartridges whose developers have long been out of business and will continue to play long after Nintendo goes out of business.

But that's the thing, people are latching on to these highly unlikely issues and blowing them out of proportion. You don't need a continuous online connection to play. The DRM only requires a user to check-in once every 24 hours. If your internet connection goes out for two, three, even 20+ hours, no big deal. Who doesn't have an internet connection of some sort these days? Our laptops and multiple other devices are dependent and fully connected 24/7, but nobody brings this up. Again, the people that can afford these consoles most likely have the means to afford even a shitty 1mbps connection which would suffice.

And in regards to the server issue, they have the ability to lift the DRM restriction should it ever be necessary. They have 300,000 servers that will probably be scaled down in the distant future as the user base moves on to the next, next generation.

And that last example is a bit of a slippery slope fallacy; no company would make such an illogical decision. The proposed policies make sense, honestly. People are taking it personally when they shouldn't, and in the end they're not being forced to buy the damn thing. The PS4's going to be right there so they can vote with their wallets if they're not content.

[Year's_End]

Originally Posted by Wakka

XB1 doesnt have good RAM, Graphics, or CPU. they missed everything real gamers actually want, and gave them everything they dont want. Sure maybe it suits you, but 90% of the people that actually buy consoles are not as fortunate as the people on this forum.

People with real money get a PC anyway.

It's pretty clear that they're not catering their new device strictly to the hardcore gamers anymore. I'm sure that they've gathered enough user information from the 360 to see that a large audience spends more time watching Netflix and other shit on top of gaming to justify their new marketing approach, so I wouldn't start throwing statistics out unless you've got something to back them up, Roberto.

PCs aren't as accessible to the layman, but yeah, master race and all that jazz.

[cloakster]

This is my issue...there is not a single benefit to the gamer with these new DRM and used game restrictions, yet they are talking about it like there is a benefit. They should just tell us straight up that it is a DRM scheme. EA lied to us about the Sims DRM stuff and it fucked them over. How could MS not have learned from that?

[amanda hor$t]

ps3 gametime has tapered off drastically... so i might just be stuck on that for the next few years

[carve]

Neither. Xbox 360. Never thought I'd say something so ludite...but why bother with the One? You can't really play used or rented games, need internet even to play offline, need the kinect connected (and it can't even be turned off without unplugging the console!) and all its privacy issues, the real kicker, no backwards compatibility with old games. The PS4 isn't compatible with my old games, either, so they're letting a lot of old customers go. It's a major selling point for the first couple years.

What does it really offer? Maybe better graphics (which haven't been much of a selling point for the last 5 years, and the PS4 will beat it in anyway). Better kinect? A blu-ray drive? Meh. Very underwhelming after such a long development cycle.


I suppose when my 360 dies I'll get a PS4. No more xbox live fees just to watch netflix movies.

Edit: I LOL'd at the video above. All the Sony guy had to do is say what the console DIDN'T do and the crowd went wild. MS isn't doing so well lately.

[Wakka]

Originally Posted by Year's_End

It's pretty clear that they're not catering their new device strictly to the hardcore gamers anymore. I'm sure that they've gathered enough user information from the 360 to see that a large audience spends more time watching Netflix and other shit on top of gaming to justify their new marketing approach, so I wouldn't start throwing statistics out unless you've got something to back them up, Roberto.

PCs aren't as accessible to the layman, but yeah, master race and all that jazz.

You are right, they know what their customers want. That is exactly why everyone is so ecstatic about it right? That is exactly why ps4 pre sale is sold out on amazon and xbone is not right? I think microsoft over stepped their bounds here, and that is coming from an xbox 360 fan boy.

I have never owned a playstation, not once. I had Sega genesis, N64, gamecube, the first xbox, then xbox 360. Sadly, it will now be PS4. Damn microsoft for making me do this.

[BossSauce]

Originally Posted by Year's_End

I'll be getting both eventually, X1 first followed by PS4. I've been an owner of both consoles for the past three gens.

I want to voice my opinion on the X1, since there is so much vitriol thrown at it. First off, its concept suits me (23 years old, less time for games) quite well. I love the idea of an all-in-one media device. As much as I miss my games, I only spend about 30-60 mins every other day gaming. Here's my take on the popular criticism that's going around:

1) People are complaining about the Kinect always being on and becoming an invasion of privacy, especially as recent news of the NSA's monitoring has surfaced and blown up. This has no effect on me and I can't muster up a single fuck should it be used to monitor my gaming and television habits. And that's not even considering the fact that a cell phone is a far more versatile and invasive device.

2) There's a large deal of hate directed at the new DRM policy. As someone that has an Internet connection (like the majority of people living in a developed country, especially those that have the expendable income to buy a console and the games to go with it), has rarely bought used games, and hasn't shared a game since highschool, this has zero effect on me. This might affect the small minority of consumers that somehow have the ability to spend boo-koo bucks on a console but can't afford Internet access, and it might affect the other crowd of frugal (or low-income) gamers that can't afford new games by eliminating their ability to purchase used. Plus, we have no idea how their pricing structure will work as games begin to age. They might offer sales somewhat similar to the highly-praised (and yet, almost identical) Steam service.

What doesn't make much sense to me is the requirement to check-in (even if it's just once every 24 hours) to play single-player games. It's not a problem for me, but it's a bit strange.

It sounds like Microsoft is trying to help protect developers, which is a completely logical business decision IMO. It's absurdly difficult to survive as a game developer these days thanks to increased budget requirements, increased piracy, and diminished returns from used purchases. For game pirates and used game dependants, this is an issue. I think developers will flock to the X1 because of this.

*The difficulty of surviving as a game developer is also a huge reason why big companies churn out shit sequels year after year (like COD) as opposed to creating new IPs; if it sells, don't take a risk.

(Sony's PS4 doesn't mandate DRM, but it does leave the option available to the developer)

3) I need Forza. And my girlfriend loves playing on the Kinect, so she gets something out of it as well.

I'm really tired of seeing the exaggerated hate against the X1. The PS4 is a fantastic machine as well. Different strokes for different folks, they're both great choices in the end.

i dont like you. durka durka

[txz4]

Originally Posted by Seminole

YESSS!

The really is only one correct answer to this poll though.

Playstation is the only console brand that has Gran Turismo. Done and done.

[Year's_End]

Originally Posted by Wakka

You are right, they know what their customers want. That is exactly why everyone is so ecstatic about it right? That is exactly why ps4 pre sale is sold out on amazon and xbone is not right? I think microsoft over stepped their bounds here, and that is coming from an xbox 360 fan boy.

I have never owned a playstation, not once. I had Sega genesis, N64, gamecube, the first xbox, then xbox 360. Sadly, it will now be PS4. Damn microsoft for making me do this.

Their preorder figures were neck-and-neck a few days ago, with news that a small gap opened in the PS4's favor in the past day or two. It's not like the PS4 is sold out while the Xbox is left twiddling its thumbs.

The people voicing their passionate (and exaggerated imo) gripes and grumbles online will be the hardcore gamer market above all else. They're the ones getting rubbed the wrong way, not the market of casual gamers that can't be bothered about DRM trivialities and the like.

On top of this, the success of either of these systems is completely impossible to determine now, or at any point in the near future. The PS3 was lambasted at the beginning of the last gen, albeit to a lesser degree, but it wasn't an indication of its performance as the years went on. I was an example of this; nothing sparked an interest in me for the first half of its lifecycle, then GT5 and a few other games came out and I plopped down the money for one.

The ultimate deciding factor for these consoles will come down to publisher support, exclusive titles, online service quality, and amenities on offer. The $100 price difference is near-negligible seeing as that's the cost of a game and a half.

They're two different approaches. Attacking the Xbox One because it's not catering to the hardcore gamer's every whim is missing the concept entirely. The demographic has expanded and the device has changed as a result.