Page 7 of 8 FirstFirst ... 7 ... LastLast
Results 151 to 175 of 184
  1. #151
    Ultimate Veteran
    Lefein's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2005
    Age
    33
    Posts
    22,962
    Rep Power
    193
    Points
    107,327 (0 Banked)
    Achievements IT'S OVER 9000!
    Quote Originally Posted by Sufi View Post
    Oh God, not the "let's agree to disagree" thing. I wanna know who won that $#@!!

    Aigh, one more! We're still playing! Come'own, les go!
    February 20th.

  2. #152
    Soldier 95B
    Guest
    Quote Originally Posted by Lefein View Post
    February 20th.
    I R pumped. I just hope they announce that it will be out this year.

  3. #153
    Super Moderator
    PS4freak's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2006
    Location
    Louisiana
    PSN ID
    lsutigers19
    Age
    26
    Posts
    13,767
    Rep Power
    143
    Points
    84,648 (190,439 Banked)
    Items Final Fantasy XIIIFinal Fantasy XCall of Duty: Black OPSDragon Ball ZPS3 SlimGoogle Chrome
    Achievements IT'S OVER 9000!
    Quote Originally Posted by Soldier 95B View Post
    I R pumped. I just hope they announce that it will be out this year.
    You and me both!




    Currently Playing: ​ Watch Dogs
    Currently Waiting For: ​​ ​Destiny

  4. #154
    Extreme Poster
    mistercrow's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    Location
    Texas
    PSN ID
    mistercrow
    Posts
    25,535
    Rep Power
    166
    Points
    169,417 (0 Banked)
    Achievements IT'S OVER 9000!
    Quote Originally Posted by Sufi View Post
    Oh God, not the "let's agree to disagree" thing. I wanna know who won that $#@!! Aigh, one more! We're still playing! Come'own, les go!
    Lets agree to disagree just means I have nothing left to counter your argument with. So you already have your winner. lol
    Last edited by mistercrow; 02-12-2013 at 18:19.

  5. #155
    Soldier 95B
    Guest
    Quote Originally Posted by radgamer420 View Post
    lets agree to disagree just means i have nothing left to counter your argument with. So you already have your winner. Lol
    lol

  6. #156
    Supreme Veteran
    Ixion's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2005
    Location
    New York
    PSN ID
    MagicManGSC
    Age
    24
    Posts
    19,917
    Rep Power
    160
    Points
    69,900 (0 Banked)
    Achievements IT'S OVER 9000!
    Quote Originally Posted by radgamer420 View Post
    Lets agree to disagree just means I have nothing left to counter your argument with. So you already have your winner. lol
    Perhaps, but sometimes you just realize you won't get anywhere, or you'll just be repeating yourself, or it's too subjective, etc.

  7. #157
    Extreme Poster
    mistercrow's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    Location
    Texas
    PSN ID
    mistercrow
    Posts
    25,535
    Rep Power
    166
    Points
    169,417 (0 Banked)
    Achievements IT'S OVER 9000!
    Quote Originally Posted by Ixion View Post
    Perhaps, but sometimes you just realize you won't get anywhere, or you'll just be repeating yourself, or it's too subjective, etc.
    Yep that is sometimes the case as well. I just didnt get that impression this time. But no big deal either way. It was meant in a lighthearted way.
    Last edited by mistercrow; 02-12-2013 at 19:00.

  8. #158
    Forum Overseer
    Omar's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2005
    Location
    Addison, TX.
    Age
    32
    Posts
    30,479
    Rep Power
    190
    Points
    107,289 (0 Banked)
    Achievements IT'S OVER 9000!
    It's like I'm falling in love with this form all over AGAIN XD *says out loud*

  9. #159
    Ultimate Veteran
    Lefein's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2005
    Age
    33
    Posts
    22,962
    Rep Power
    193
    Points
    107,327 (0 Banked)
    Achievements IT'S OVER 9000!
    For me, it's the cloud of speculation. Time will prove me right or wrong.

  10. #160
    Forum Sage
    MATRIX 2's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2005
    Location
    D.C.
    Posts
    7,983
    Rep Power
    112
    Points
    43,229 (0 Banked)
    Quote Originally Posted by Lefein View Post
    You are a human being, not a gamer-tag. You might even possibly be a gamer. Microsoft saw Sony strap a console to a CD player and make it's way into over 100 million homes with the PS1. MS had to stand on the sidelines and watch Sony do it again with a DVD player in the PS2. So what did MS do? They zigged with HD-DVD when Sony zagged with BluRay come time for the current gen. It had nothing to do with giving you choice or even about backing a superior format and everything to do with how many houses Sony had access to. Over the course of years, MS kept their eye on the ball by putting their weight behind Live, even when it meant cutting the budget for first party games or even closing studios. Too late in the game, they saw that Nintendo had the right idea and decided to put half a billion dollars in re-branding the 360 as a motion controller oriented device.

    And here we are, at the cusp of a new generation. You can be sure they are covering all of the bases with some kind of tablet controller, cell phone integration, Kinect right out of the box day 1, and the actual game controller as an afterthought. The system itself, centralized around 8GBs of slow and WTF. After all, there's no format war to hide behind this time around. Will it dawn on you too late that the games are actually the third or fourth function this is designed for? Probably not. In fact, I'm more than just a little bit willing to bet you will proclaim every sequel to Halo, Gears of War or Forza as Gaming Messiah just as you have done throughout this generation while more studios close or get relegated to the undead state known as Rare. Nevermind you can't sell your games to pay for new ones or continue to be unable to play the games you buy online without paying your excise to the "Microsoft sees me as a revenue stream" fund.. irregardless of the fact they sell information and space on said paid online to advertisers in the first place.

    No, you won't draw that line in the sand. You will plug in your microhpone enabled camera to keep track of how many unique males and females use your system at any given time and tow the line that it's "progress" when your system recognizes you from your sister. Just pay no mind to the odd occasional jump from GI Joe The Movie advertisements to the inexplicable Barby's Playhouse Theme you can buy now for $2.99. It's all progress, and don't let anyone tell you a gaming system really should have faster RAM. Those people are fanboys who "just don't get it." After all, you can pause Halo 5 and watch Netflix. You're the boss! Drink the kool-aid.
    Why did Sony get into the console business? Because they got shafted by Nintendo. Because of that they wanted to get back at them. And it also made sense to continue on with what would become the first Playstation because it didn't make sense to let all that prior work go to waste.

    So because of a poorly crafted contract between Nintendo and Sony along with the poor handling of the aftermath lead to the creation of the Playstation console.

    Now lets look at why MS got into the console business:

    http://www.ign.com/articles/2013/02/...nsole-business

    Basically they saw the Playstation evolving into a tangible threat to their dominance of the personal computer market. So they decided to head Sony off. And it is a good thing they did because based on what happened to Sega and the direction Nintendo, if it wasn't for Microsoft the console world would be a rather dull place due to the domination of one company.

    For some reason you dwell on the disc formats backed by each company. I'm not sure what the point was, but if you think Sony wasn't playing the same game MS was you clearly need to ground yourself in reality.

    Sony was tired of losing format wars. They failed with betamax, mini disc, ATRAC and the Memory Stick.

    They were battered in the personal audio device market by Apple, losing their once dominant position with the walkman.

    They also lost ground in the cellphone market initially to Nokia, Motorola and Samsung, and then with smartphones to Apple as well.

    Based upon all these losses and the few successes Sony had, helping to craft the CD and DVD standards they needed another big win.

    So they bet it all on Blu-Ray to try and get back into the game. Ultimately they were successful, but in the process of achieving success they nearly destroyed the Playstation brand.

    MS had its reasons for backing HD-DVD, but don't act like Sony had holier than thou reasons for pushing Blu-Ray. Hell I'll go so far as to day that their reasons were actually worse/more selfish than those of MS.

    It basically came down to Sony doing whatever it could to ensure that Blu-Ray would be then next optical disc standard, the successor to DVD. So they stuck it in the PS3 to ensure maximum penetration into households. They may have wont the format war because of that, but it cost them their place in this generation dearly.

    And don't think that PSN being free was Sony giving you the gamer a choice either. There is now way they could get away with charging for PSN online gaming with the state it was in compared to what lives was like. They had to make it free if they wanted any chance of success there, don't be fooled into the believing the illusion of choice.


    Funny how you bring up MS focusing on live at the expense of games (mostly first party). Before I address this point, I will note that as of a few years ago, MS was making 1 billion usd of of live gold subscriptions alone. This does not account for any content sold on live or increases in subscriber count since then.

    But back to your statement. Funny how MS did exactly the opposite with the original Xbox. I remember there being tons of first party/exclusive 3rd party games on the original Xbox. They mostly existed because the Xbox had the power to run them while the PS2/Gamecube did not.

    There were some great games that generation only available on the xbox. Unfortunately that + xbox live was not enough to make a significant dent in the console marketplace regarding marketshare.

    But Microsoft got their foot in the door. And they were the first to launch a broadband only online gaming service.

    You want to know why MS change lanes partway through this generation? Several reasons exist for the changes. One reason was money. The original xbox console cost MS ~4 billion. Live development was another ~1 billion. That is quite a bit of money they wanted to recoup. When you add in the 1 billion to double the memory on the 360 and another 1 billion to fix RROD consoles, it made the situation that much worse. So MS didn't want to put in the time and effort to create 1st party games/3rd party exclusives only to have them dismally perform regarding sales and profit. (Which is what happened to Sony this generation) They needed games that would sell well and make money so MS could have something to show for their investment.

    At the same time they started to see the threat's Apple and Google posed to MS with their software/hardware ecosystems. MS needed to respond or risk losing even more. The beginnings of this ecosystem started with Windows 7 for personal computers, Windows Phone 7 for smartphones, the Xbox 360 for consoles and the various online Microsoft software/services.

    Thirdly they were looking at the future of gaming down the road. To think that we would still be using the same basic controllers as our sole means of input several decades down the line is rather dull. So MS started working on a possible means of input that they thought has some long term promise. That was Kinect. It obviously hasn't been useful in core games, but that is mostly due to the limited nature of the 1 gen hardware and developers needing time to figure out how to properly integrate Kinect into their games in a useful or purposeful manner that actually enhances the game experience.


    If you think Nintendo has the right idea with their motion control tangent you are crazy. It was a desperate attempt for Nintendo to stay in the game and remain profitable. It worked. But that was a one time thing. We already see how badly the Wii U is doing compared to the Wii, that situation will only worsen as the PS3/360 become cheaper and the next generation consoles are launched from Microsoft/Sony.

    Nintendo's main mistake was trying to compete by targeting a completely different sector of the gaming market than Microsoft/Sony. Even though their console sales were declining with every console since the original NES they should have stuck with it. The N64 might have sold a third as many consoles as the Playstation but I maintain that it provided the best gaming experience of any console to date. And while the games cube was even worse off that the N64 it still provided several great gaming experience that you couldn't find anywhere else.

    But what did Nintendo do, they turned their back on the core gamers in favor of the fickle and insignificant casual/new gamer market. Nobody talks about that.

    But enough about Nintendo, back to Sony and Microsoft.



    Funny how you are quick to blame Microsoft for turning the Xbox into a multimedia device instead of just being a gaming console when Sony was the first to start this trend.

    The original Playstation played audio cd's. The PS2 played audio cd's and dvd's. The PSX was a PS2 with DVR functionality. Finally we have the PS3. What doesn't it do? The 360's media capabilities mostly cover its use as a streaming device, a media extender from your computer. It wasn't meant to be a hub of entertainment (though it ended up doing just that, albeit through a different means than the PS3).

    The PS3 on the other hand? Considering how many ports Sony put on the console and the emphasis on a freely upgradable HDD combined with software and interface (XMB, cross media bar) it would be hypocritical to say that the PS3 was anything but a media hub that happened to be a gaming console. But because Sony "delivered" on the games, you overlook this along with the other issues (like the whole Blu-Ray thing). And WTF was Home all about, eh? More social gaming (i.e. casual) gaming BS.

    But when MS does the same thing, you have only criticism for them?

    What is this bull$#@! about Microsoft not focusing on the "actual game controller". Last I checked they are evolving the 360 controller design which is pretty damn good in my eyes. The biggest issue was the dpad and that was mostly rectified partway through this generation, what more do you want from a controller?

    Funny how I don't recall you saying these things when the final controller for the PS3 didn't have rumble support which was discarded in favor of sixaxis motion control. (Hmm, Sony's first attempt at staving off Nintendo's motion controls with the Wii).

    "The system is centralized around 8GB's of slow and WTF."

    Last I checked Microsoft was primarily a software development company. With a lot of experience. More on this in a bit. But a quick history/reality check first.

    What was Sony's most successful gaming console? The PS2. Which also happened to be the weakest of the three main gaming consoles of that generation. Funny how there wasn't an issue there because Sony had the vast majority of games. Meanwhile at the same time Microsoft had the strongest console that gen, and look how that went.

    FF to this generation. Sony has the "most powerful console" (theoretically) while MS had the most easy to develop for console. We saw which approach ended up working out best this gen.

    But back to MS being a software development company.

    MS knows that a good advantage goes to the console that is easiest to develop for/port to. So it is logical to think that they made that emphasis even greater with the next Xbox.

    Sony seems to have gotten the message as well which is why they went with a much simpler/more traditional design that should be much easier to develop/port to than the PS3 ever was.

    Now It seems that MS have made some concessions regarding the GPU and overall performance in order to give the next xbox more media capabilities. Is this as bad as people have been making it out to be: I highly doubt it.

    Remember how I mentioned earlier that MS spent 1 billion usd on doubling the ram for the 360 instead of having half the amount and a standard hdd essentially due to Epic Games.

    I'm sure they talked to Epic along with various other high profile developers when they were designing the 360. The probably discussed what developers did and did not like about developing for the 360 and what they wanted with the next xbox/next generation of consoles. I'm sure MS eagerly listened to their thoughts and used them to pick and design the internals of the next xbox. It seems that in their final design, things are a bit less powerful on the gpu side compared to the rumored specs for the PS4.

    IIRC regarding System Floating Point Performance , the 360 claimed 1 teraflop and the ps3 claimed 2 teraflops. Pretty big difference right? We see how that worked out in the real world this generation.

    Now regarding the GPU of the next Xbox and PS4 the next Xbox gpu is rumored to be able to produce ~1.2 teraflops of performance while the PS4 gpu claims ~1.8 teraflops. A significant difference, though not as much with the 360 and PS3.

    And of course we are assuming developers do their best to make the most of the hardware for both consoles.

    Thing is I don't think that will end up being the case for developers. I think since that the PS4 and Next xbox are so similar developers will just make sure their games will run reasonably on both consoles and call it a day. MS won't have the multiplat advantage anymore, but Sony won't have it either. It will come down to exclusives to show off the hardware of both consonances. And of course that changes things significantly compared to looking at the performance differences in multiplat games.

    Basically to sum things up, I don't think it is the issue that people make it out to be and that I'm sure MS had made sure that the ease of development makes up for any performance shortcomings of the hardware.

    I'd love to know what functions you think would be placed ahead of gaming in the next xbox.

    While something like ~40% of use of the 360 is non gaming related, I highly doubt people will drop ~$400 on a stationary device for just their non gaming media/entertainment needs.

    Closing studios? i believe this topic has been discussed multiple times in the past year or so, but all evidence points to MS putting more effort into creating/acquiring studios to produce various games for the next xbox. Which would also explain the decrease of exclusive/1st party games on the 360 these last few years.

    Not sure what the whole "Nevermind you can't sell your games to pay for new ones " is about.


    Funny how you complain about the ads on the Xbox. You realize MS is making money off of live subs, right? Can Sony say the same? (not really, PSN+ revenue isn't even comparable). So as I see it sony has 2 choices next generation for PSN. Paid subscriptions or keeping it free. If the chose the latter option it would be foolish to assume that PSN will not have ads like live. Somebody has to pay for the service and PSN+ isn't enough. And don't act like Sony doesn't see you as a revenue stream either, just because they happen to throw you a few bones every now and then.



    I find it hard to believe the rumors of Kinect being required to be plugged into the console for it to function at all. There has been a lot of concern over peoples privacy over the past year or 2 and this wouldn't go over well because of that.

    But I'll play along.

    So I plug in the kinect hardware for it to verify myself and to sign in to my profile/gamertag. What is then stopping me from pointing it at the wall or another surface/object away from me and going about my business?


    Your absolutely right. I'm not going to let certain smug/entitled/condescending individuals who are too busy worshiping some other company tell me this or that. I'll leave that up to the developers who know what they are talking about/are doing are less prone to bias/not being objective. Really it is only their opinion that matters regarding this sort of thing considering they are the ones who make the games for these consoles. And last I checked I never said a damn thing about the memory setups in the PS4/next Xbox be it good , bad or just plain neutral. Good job trying to lasso me into a group with others.

    Go right on ahead with your Sony worship, it only continues to blind you to reality and what really goes on in this world (especially Sony's missteps) (I especially like the line about Sony's shortcomings this gen only being cause by their actions and not those of Nintendo or Microsoft (must be some really big shortcomings compared to the RROD fiasco (what could be worse than that?)), I'll be sure to hold you guys to that when you say that Sony's success (assuming that happens this coming this generation) is only due to their actions and not those of MS/Nintendo). It also provides endless entertainment for myself and other members on this forum who view things through relatively clear lenses.

    And for the record, I don't pay to subscribe to any media streaming services (like netflix) or even cable/satellite tv for that matter.

    And I have yet to spend a single Microsoft point on the xbl marketplace for any kind of content. (Keep in mind I've owned a 360 since launch day).


    Have fun with all those games, while I'm stuck in the empty abyss that is the Xbox ecosystem as you claim (Never mind the fact that I find the vast majority of those Playstation games unappealing, while the opposite is true for the miniscule amount of 360 games out there)


    I thank you for remaining true to yourself in that post. It just proves you haven't changes one bit since you arrived here back in 2005.


    And for those PSU members that were not here "back in the good old days", here is a little tidbit of what the forums were like around this stage in the console wars at the beginning of this current generation.

    http://www.psu.com/forums/showthread...d-*Revision-1*

    Looks like a lot more damage control then the what is claimed to exist now for the next xbox.

    And I would have a lot more respect for you Lefein if you were as upfront as Ebony was.

    Let the games speak for themselves because that is the only thing that really matters.


    You may now resume the Doom and Gloom attitude.

  11. #161
    Forum Sage
    Itachi's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2010
    Location
    Winterfell
    PSN ID
    iwinulose042
    Age
    20
    Posts
    8,322
    Rep Power
    83
    Points
    30,849 (151,503 Banked)
    Items Final Fantasy XIII-2Final Fantasy XIIIFull Metal AlchemistDragon Ball ZNarutoDeath NoteNaughty DogLightningNoctisAssassins Creed EzioPS3 Slim
    Sweet Lord All Mighty!

    I'm never gonna read all that

  12. #162
    Forum Sage
    DeviousOne's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2012
    Location
    Orlando FL
    PSN ID
    DeviousOnePSU
    Age
    31
    Posts
    9,551
    Rep Power
    68
    Points
    61,675 (1,943 Banked)
    Items NintendoFirefox LogoPSN LogoWii BlackPaper MarioWiiUGran Turismo 53DSPS3 Slim
    Achievements IT'S OVER 9000!
    Good post Matrix I read the whole damn thing lol

    ~~~OLD SKOOL~~~

  13. #163
    Elite Guru
    Nitey's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2011
    Age
    25
    Posts
    5,675
    Rep Power
    62
    Points
    40,911 (0 Banked)
    Items DreamcastDeath Note LArsenal
    I read it too! It was an interesting take on history

    I liked this part:

    It also provides endless entertainment for myself and other members on this forum who view things through relatively clear lenses.
    Let the wars begin!

    - The thread by that Ebony fella seems epic O_o too bad didn't read

  14. #164
    Ultimate Veteran
    Lefein's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2005
    Age
    33
    Posts
    22,962
    Rep Power
    193
    Points
    107,327 (0 Banked)
    Achievements IT'S OVER 9000!
    Quote Originally Posted by MATRIX 2 View Post
    Why did Sony get into the console business? Because they got shafted by Nintendo. Because of that they wanted to get back at them. And it also made sense to continue on with what would become the first Playstation because it didn't make sense to let all that prior work go to waste.

    So because of a poorly crafted contract between Nintendo and Sony along with the poor handling of the aftermath lead to the creation of the Playstation console.
    No arguments there. Sony got wrapped up in videogames earlier than that when they made the sound processor for the Super Nintendo. They were obviously doing their homework.

    Now lets look at why MS got into the console business:

    http://www.ign.com/articles/2013/02/...nsole-business

    Basically they saw the Playstation evolving into a tangible threat to their dominance of the personal computer market. So they decided to head Sony off. And it is a good thing they did because based on what happened to Sega and the direction Nintendo, if it wasn't for Microsoft the console world would be a rather dull place due to the domination of one company.
    Again, a console born of paranoia from a capital-bloated company. Seems you corroborated my version of the story quite well. Riddle me this, riddle me that.. How come when Sony dominated gaming we saw more games come to console than any other time in history? This notion that gaming NEEDS Xbox is at the heart of my debate, and we may never see eye to eye on it, at least until a fourth player steps in or investors tire of Xbox not finishing first evrar.

    For some reason you dwell on the disc formats backed by each company. I'm not sure what the point was, but if you think Sony wasn't playing the same game MS was you clearly need to ground yourself in reality.

    Sony was tired of losing format wars. They failed with betamax, mini disc, ATRAC and the Memory Stick.

    They were battered in the personal audio device market by Apple, losing their once dominant position with the walkman.

    They also lost ground in the cellphone market initially to Nokia, Motorola and Samsung, and then with smartphones to Apple as well.

    Based upon all these losses and the few successes Sony had, helping to craft the CD and DVD standards they needed another big win.

    So they bet it all on Blu-Ray to try and get back into the game. Ultimately they were successful, but in the process of achieving success they nearly destroyed the Playstation brand.

    MS had its reasons for backing HD-DVD, but don't act like Sony had holier than thou reasons for pushing Blu-Ray. Hell I'll go so far as to day that their reasons were actually worse/more selfish than those of MS.
    Well, considering BluRay is able to handle 4K and HD-DVD wouldn't, regardless of anyones high intentions or not, BRD was the right choice and consumers saw through the smokescreen. I'm not claiming Sony is high and mighty for leveraging BluRay. I'm stating quite the opposite, they played their hand and it hurt. A lesson that MS appears to be lining up for with Durango.

    But, let's not kid ourselves. I'll call a spade a spade. No one with three IQ numbers to rub together in their pretty little head would foresee HD-DVD going anywhere. ALL that was accomplished by Microsofts vouchers and dirty tactics was that they ensured the PS3 would have as high a cost as possible to manufacture. The first generation of those diodes were extremely costly to manufacture and Sony did not produce them internally. Every diode that went into an HD-DVD player was one essentially ripped out of the hands of a potential PS3 owner. If you can make a claim that Sony plays THAT dirty, then hats off to you. Until then? Spare me the sanctimony.

    It basically came down to Sony doing whatever it could to ensure that Blu-Ray would be then next optical disc standard, the successor to DVD. So they stuck it in the PS3 to ensure maximum penetration into households. They may have wont the format war because of that, but it cost them their place in this generation dearly.

    And don't think that PSN being free was Sony giving you the gamer a choice either. There is now way they could get away with charging for PSN online gaming with the state it was in compared to what lives was like. They had to make it free if they wanted any chance of success there, don't be fooled into the believing the illusion of choice.
    And again, I say, PC seems to be alive and well without the need of Live. In fact Steam, which is a free service, is so far beyond Live in revenue generation that it makes the subscription model look archaic. There is nothing that Live does that is necessarily new or innovative, it just takes what has already been done and gives it an interface.. An advertisement swollen one at that.

    Funny how you bring up MS focusing on live at the expense of games (mostly first party). Before I address this point, I will note that as of a few years ago, MS was making 1 billion usd of of live gold subscriptions alone. This does not account for any content sold on live or increases in subscriber count since then.

    But back to your statement. Funny how MS did exactly the opposite with the original Xbox. I remember there being tons of first party/exclusive 3rd party games on the original Xbox. They mostly existed because the Xbox had the power to run them while the PS2/Gamecube did not.

    There were some great games that generation only available on the xbox. Unfortunately that + xbox live was not enough to make a significant dent in the console marketplace regarding marketshare.

    But Microsoft got their foot in the door. And they were the first to launch a broadband only online gaming service.
    ..and now, with Durango, they are abandoning having a strong specification in order to change focus from those games. Kinda ironic, don't you think? It's like rain on your wedding day..

    You want to know why MS change lanes partway through this generation? Several reasons exist for the changes. One reason was money. The original xbox console cost MS ~4 billion. Live development was another ~1 billion. That is quite a bit of money they wanted to recoup. When you add in the 1 billion to double the memory on the 360 and another 1 billion to fix RROD consoles, it made the situation that much worse. So MS didn't want to put in the time and effort to create 1st party games/3rd party exclusives only to have them dismally perform regarding sales and profit. (Which is what happened to Sony this generation) They needed games that would sell well and make money so MS could have something to show for their investment.
    Now, let's pause for a moment and ask the important question.. How does that benefit you as a gamer or as a Microsoft customer? It doesn't.

    At the same time they started to see the threat's Apple and Google posed to MS with their software/hardware ecosystems. MS needed to respond or risk losing even more. The beginnings of this ecosystem started with Windows 7 for personal computers, Windows Phone 7 for smartphones, the Xbox 360 for consoles and the various online Microsoft software/services.
    How does this benefit you?

    Thirdly they were looking at the future of gaming down the road. To think that we would still be using the same basic controllers as our sole means of input several decades down the line is rather dull. So MS started working on a possible means of input that they thought has some long term promise. That was Kinect. It obviously hasn't been useful in core games, but that is mostly due to the limited nature of the 1 gen hardware and developers needing time to figure out how to properly integrate Kinect into their games in a useful or purposeful manner that actually enhances the game experience.
    Bro, it was the Wii. It was the fad. It was "the wave of the future".. Hope you get the reference.

    If you think Nintendo has the right idea with their motion control tangent you are crazy. It was a desperate attempt for Nintendo to stay in the game and remain profitable. It worked. But that was a one time thing. We already see how badly the Wii U is doing compared to the Wii, that situation will only worsen as the PS3/360 become cheaper and the next generation consoles are launched from Microsoft/Sony.

    Nintendo's main mistake was trying to compete by targeting a completely different sector of the gaming market than Microsoft/Sony. Even though their console sales were declining with every console since the original NES they should have stuck with it. The N64 might have sold a third as many consoles as the Playstation but I maintain that it provided the best gaming experience of any console to date. And while the games cube was even worse off that the N64 it still provided several great gaming experience that you couldn't find anywhere else.

    But what did Nintendo do, they turned their back on the core gamers in favor of the fickle and insignificant casual/new gamer market. Nobody talks about that.

    But enough about Nintendo, back to Sony and Microsoft.
    I would agree. It was a fad. Thankfully, I can only point at ONE MANUFACTURER who dumped half a billion dollars into trying to suckle that honey when it had ran dry. It just so happens to be the same one that sold Bungie.. Lulz.

    Funny how you are quick to blame Microsoft for turning the Xbox into a multimedia device instead of just being a gaming console when Sony was the first to start this trend.

    The original Playstation played audio cd's. The PS2 played audio cd's and dvd's. The PSX was a PS2 with DVR functionality. Finally we have the PS3. What doesn't it do? The 360's media capabilities mostly cover its use as a streaming device, a media extender from your computer. It wasn't meant to be a hub of entertainment (though it ended up doing just that, albeit through a different means than the PS3).

    The PS3 on the other hand? Considering how many ports Sony put on the console and the emphasis on a freely upgradable HDD combined with software and interface (XMB, cross media bar) it would be hypocritical to say that the PS3 was anything but a media hub that happened to be a gaming console. But because Sony "delivered" on the games, you overlook this along with the other issues (like the whole Blu-Ray thing). And WTF was Home all about, eh? More social gaming (i.e. casual) gaming BS.

    But when MS does the same thing, you have only criticism for them?
    It's about the results.

    What is this bull$#@! about Microsoft not focusing on the "actual game controller". Last I checked they are evolving the 360 controller design which is pretty damn good in my eyes. The biggest issue was the dpad and that was mostly rectified partway through this generation, what more do you want from a controller?

    Funny how I don't recall you saying these things when the final controller for the PS3 didn't have rumble support which was discarded in favor of sixaxis motion control. (Hmm, Sony's first attempt at staving off Nintendo's motion controls with the Wii).
    You're absolutely right. I think I was spending more time LoLing about seeing whether or not people actually wanted MovieGear Solid 4 to come to the 360 or not when they were jumping on just about every rumor that it would and then crapping all over it when it wouldn't. I was always focused on the games. Never backing down from the "8GBs is enough for gaming" argument.. By the way, how is Spartan Ops? Lulz.

    "The system is centralized around 8GB's of slow and WTF."

    Last I checked Microsoft was primarily a software development company. With a lot of experience. More on this in a bit. But a quick history/reality check first.

    What was Sony's most successful gaming console? The PS2. Which also happened to be the weakest of the three main gaming consoles of that generation. Funny how there wasn't an issue there because Sony had the vast majority of games. Meanwhile at the same time Microsoft had the strongest console that gen, and look how that went.
    But you are SO wrong. It was the Playstation 1. You may have heard of it. Final Fantasy VII says Hi. It had the easiest development environment amongs the game consoles of its generation. So easy it was, in fact, that you should probably do a Google search for "Net Yaroze." Oh yeah, how is XNA coming along? ...Lulz.

    FF to this generation. Sony has the "most powerful console" (theoretically) while MS had the most easy to develop for console. We saw which approach ended up working out best this gen.

    But back to MS being a software development company.

    MS knows that a good advantage goes to the console that is easiest to develop for/port to. So it is logical to think that they made that emphasis even greater with the next Xbox.

    Sony seems to have gotten the message as well which is why they went with a much simpler/more traditional design that should be much easier to develop/port to than the PS3 ever was.

    Now It seems that MS have made some concessions regarding the GPU and overall performance in order to give the next xbox more media capabilities. Is this as bad as people have been making it out to be: I highly doubt it.
    So after that diatribe you're saying it's okay for MS to not make a straightforward game console... why? Now we're getting into the part of the debate where all we can do is argue over speculation and conjecture, but why premise it all with this? Methinks you've lost the plot here.

    Remember how I mentioned earlier that MS spent 1 billion usd on doubling the ram for the 360 instead of having half the amount and a standard hdd essentially due to Epic Games.

    I'm sure they talked to Epic along with various other high profile developers when they were designing the 360. The probably discussed what developers did and did not like about developing for the 360 and what they wanted with the next xbox/next generation of consoles. I'm sure MS eagerly listened to their thoughts and used them to pick and design the internals of the next xbox. It seems that in their final design, things are a bit less powerful on the gpu side compared to the rumored specs for the PS4.

    IIRC regarding System Floating Point Performance , the 360 claimed 1 teraflop and the ps3 claimed 2 teraflops. Pretty big difference right? We see how that worked out in the real world this generation.

    Now regarding the GPU of the next Xbox and PS4 the next Xbox gpu is rumored to be able to produce ~1.2 teraflops of performance while the PS4 gpu claims ~1.8 teraflops. A significant difference, though not as much with the 360 and PS3.

    And of course we are assuming developers do their best to make the most of the hardware for both consoles.

    Thing is I don't think that will end up being the case for developers. I think since that the PS4 and Next xbox are so similar developers will just make sure their games will run reasonably on both consoles and call it a day. MS won't have the multiplat advantage anymore, but Sony won't have it either. It will come down to exclusives to show off the hardware of both consonances. And of course that changes things significantly compared to looking at the performance differences in multiplat games.
    You are entitled to your opinions. I reiterate, that I am in "wait and see" mode.

    Basically to sum things up, I don't think it is the issue that people make it out to be and that I'm sure MS had made sure that the ease of development makes up for any performance shortcomings of the hardware.

    I'd love to know what functions you think would be placed ahead of gaming in the next xbox.

    While something like ~40% of use of the 360 is non gaming related, I highly doubt people will drop ~$400 on a stationary device for just their non gaming media/entertainment needs.

    Closing studios? i believe this topic has been discussed multiple times in the past year or so, but all evidence points to MS putting more effort into creating/acquiring studios to produce various games for the next xbox. Which would also explain the decrease of exclusive/1st party games on the 360 these last few years.
    Well, I'm not sure why this would convince me to buy their next product knowing that games and IP will become anemic by the end of a generation as the producer silos in for its next product offering. What do you benefit from that?

    Not sure what the whole "Nevermind you can't sell your games to pay for new ones " is about.
    Draconian DRM. Which may or may not be in the PS4 as well. As much as you want to label me a Sony flag waving fanboy, I will buy a WiiU on the 21st if Sony implements what is being said Durango will have in its DRM and always connected BS. Would you say the same about 720? I'd actually love to see you answer this so we can see who is actually a bigger fanboy

    Funny how you complain about the ads on the Xbox. You realize MS is making money off of live subs, right? Can Sony say the same? (not really, PSN+ revenue isn't even comparable). So as I see it sony has 2 choices next generation for PSN. Paid subscriptions or keeping it free. If the chose the latter option it would be foolish to assume that PSN will not have ads like live. Somebody has to pay for the service and PSN+ isn't enough. And don't act like Sony doesn't see you as a revenue stream either, just because they happen to throw you a few bones every now and then.



    I find it hard to believe the rumors of Kinect being required to be plugged into the console for it to function at all. There has been a lot of concern over peoples privacy over the past year or 2 and this wouldn't go over well because of that.

    But I'll play along.

    So I plug in the kinect hardware for it to verify myself and to sign in to my profile/gamertag. What is then stopping me from pointing it at the wall or another surface/object away from me and going about my business?


    Your absolutely right. I'm not going to let certain smug/entitled/condescending individuals who are too busy worshiping some other company tell me this or that. I'll leave that up to the developers who know what they are talking about/are doing are less prone to bias/not being objective. Really it is only their opinion that matters regarding this sort of thing considering they are the ones who make the games for these consoles. And last I checked I never said a damn thing about the memory setups in the PS4/next Xbox be it good , bad or just plain neutral. Good job trying to lasso me into a group with others.

    Go right on ahead with your Sony worship, it only continues to blind you to reality and what really goes on in this world (especially Sony's missteps) (I especially like the line about Sony's shortcomings this gen only being cause by their actions and not those of Nintendo or Microsoft (must be some really big shortcomings compared to the RROD fiasco (what could be worse than that?)), I'll be sure to hold you guys to that when you say that Sony's success (assuming that happens this coming this generation) is only due to their actions and not those of MS/Nintendo). It also provides endless entertainment for myself and other members on this forum who view things through relatively clear lenses.

    And for the record, I don't pay to subscribe to any media streaming services (like netflix) or even cable/satellite tv for that matter.

    And I have yet to spend a single Microsoft point on the xbl marketplace for any kind of content. (Keep in mind I've owned a 360 since launch day).


    Have fun with all those games, while I'm stuck in the empty abyss that is the Xbox ecosystem as you claim (Never mind the fact that I find the vast majority of those Playstation games unappealing, while the opposite is true for the miniscule amount of 360 games out there)


    I thank you for remaining true to yourself in that post. It just proves you haven't changes one bit since you arrived here back in 2005.


    And for those PSU members that were not here "back in the good old days", here is a little tidbit of what the forums were like around this stage in the console wars at the beginning of this current generation.

    http://www.psu.com/forums/showthread...d-*Revision-1*

    Looks like a lot more damage control then the what is claimed to exist now for the next xbox.

    And I would have a lot more respect for you Lefein if you were as upfront as Ebony was.

    Let the games speak for themselves because that is the only thing that really matters.


    You may now resume the Doom and Gloom attitude.
    Ahhh, now I get it. You took my post personally. That was a mistake. I didn't reply to anyone or mention names.

    Please don't take personal offense to the things I post. I use terse language and it tends to dig under people's skin. If I want to call someone out, I'll just do it. Lord knows I have enough infractions to at least prove that LOL.

    Last edited by Lefein; 02-12-2013 at 20:32.

  15. #165
    Master Poster
    RedOrb_Collector's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2006
    Age
    26
    Posts
    3,010
    Rep Power
    105
    Points
    14,310 (0 Banked)
    Items User name style
    Have fun with all those games, while I'm stuck in the empty abyss that is the Xbox ecosystem as you claim (Never mind the fact that I find the vast majority of those Playstation games unappealing, while the opposite is true for the miniscule amount of 360 games out there)
    I'm going to call bull$#@! on this.

    What was so unappealing about them to you?

    It's not like the genre distribution was particularly different this generation (the way it was in the PS2 vs Xbox1 era), nor the art-styles found across them--as most things went for 'gritty' and 'realistic' this gen.

    In all likelihood you found them unappealing because they were Playstation games. Truth be told, I am given no reason from you to think otherwise.

    I wasn't very happy with the game selection this entire generation, either for the 360 or PS3, but I ended up getting the latter simply because I saw that I would have a greater quantity of high budget software to play there, even though my overall tastes weren't being catered to as well as it was during the previous era.

    I'm also baffled as to why you think MS entering the race was such a great thing for gaming. The 360 and PS3 COMBINED, have significantly LESS games than the PS2 itself did. How was this going to be a culmination of a 'dull' domination by one company when you had more games than this fragmented generation did period? And with this greater selection of games came a more eclectic pool of visual and playstyles in the games to choose from.

    The PS2, the most dominant home console ever by far, was also the most varied console as far as game choices went. By far.
    Last edited by RedOrb_Collector; 02-12-2013 at 20:25.

  16. #166
    Master Poster
    RedOrb_Collector's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2006
    Age
    26
    Posts
    3,010
    Rep Power
    105
    Points
    14,310 (0 Banked)
    Items User name style
    As far as I'm concerned, Lefein is just spouting a bunch mush-mouth, unintelligible dribble...at least until he gets rid of that horrid GT related avatar.

    The devil's work.

  17. #167
    Soldier 95B
    Guest
    When my PS4 and Xbox 3 are parked next to each other on my entertainment stand, I should mount little flags on each one waving at each other

  18. Likes Lefein likes this post
  19. #168
    Ultimate Veteran
    Lefein's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2005
    Age
    33
    Posts
    22,962
    Rep Power
    193
    Points
    107,327 (0 Banked)
    Achievements IT'S OVER 9000!
    Quote Originally Posted by Soldier 95B View Post
    When my PS4 and Xbox 3 are parked next to each other on my entertainment stand, I should mount little flags on each one waving at each other
    I lol'd!

  20. #169
    Supreme Veteran
    mynd's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2006
    Location
    Down Under
    Age
    41
    Posts
    17,530
    Rep Power
    162
    Points
    160,669 (0 Banked)
    Items User name style
    Achievements IT'S OVER 9000!
    I'd just like to point out, in this day in age. It is not enough, to be just a game system.
    I hope Sony understands this.

    Being the most powerful dedicated gaming machine in your category=PS Vita.

    Nuff said.
    Last edited by mynd; 02-12-2013 at 20:53.

  21. #170
    Elite Sage
    Two4DaMoney's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2007
    Age
    27
    Posts
    12,449
    Rep Power
    111
    Points
    15,302 (75,576 Banked)
    Items Naughty DogPS3 SlimNaughty DogUser name style
    Achievements IT'S OVER 9000!
    Quote Originally Posted by mynd View Post
    I'd just like to point out, in this day in age. It is not enough, to be just a game system.
    I hope Sony understands this.

    Being the most powerful dedicated gaming mahcine in your category=PS Vita.

    Nuff said.
    It's not nuff said. How quickly we have forgotten "It only does everything"...I recall people(not you) saying Sony were trying to do too much with covering bases in the ps3's early life.

    I'm quite sure sony knows these things. Judging by the vita's os, the basics are going to be there. And I'm sure they'll have some other cool things too. Will it have more than MS is planning? Likely not. But that's not to say it won't be enough compared to what the people deem as cool or must have features in next gen os.
    Last edited by Two4DaMoney; 02-12-2013 at 20:58.

    Destiny and Middle Earth: Shadow of Mordor is all I need for the rest of the year.

  22. #171
    Supreme Veteran
    mynd's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2006
    Location
    Down Under
    Age
    41
    Posts
    17,530
    Rep Power
    162
    Points
    160,669 (0 Banked)
    Items User name style
    Achievements IT'S OVER 9000!
    Quote Originally Posted by Two4DaMoney View Post
    It's not nuff said. How quickly we have forgotten "It only does everything"...I recall people(not you) saying Sony were trying to do too much with covering bases in the ps3's early life.

    I'm quite sure sony knows these things. Judging by the vita's os, the basics are going to be there. And I'm sure they'll have some other cool things too. Will it have more than MS is planning? Likely not. But that's not to say it won't be enough compared to what the people deem as cool or must have features in next gen os.
    Just want to temper peoples "it's a pure gaming machine" expectations, because it wont be.
    It will have its own set of integration in to our increasingly digitally connected word.
    Thats not to say I would cringe at a dedicated facebook share button because I would.
    Last edited by mynd; 02-12-2013 at 21:07.

  23. #172
    Soldier 95B
    Guest
    I imagine the PS4 will be much more media centric (swiss army knife) compared to the PS3. That should be clear based on their goal and success with the PS3.

  24. #173
    Elite Guru
    Nitey's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2011
    Age
    25
    Posts
    5,675
    Rep Power
    62
    Points
    40,911 (0 Banked)
    Items DreamcastDeath Note LArsenal
    Quote Originally Posted by mynd View Post
    Just want to temper peoples "if a pure gaming machine" expectations, because it wont be.
    Yup its definitely going to be much more than a games console. It's obvious. I don't know where the idea that it wouldn't be has come from. An only-games console wouldnt be of much relevance in today's world unless very low priced.

    The PS3 does much more than just play games. I'd say the Vita is more than a games machine too, and will continue being updated via firmwares for that purpose

    It will have its own set of integration in to our increasingly digitally connected word.
    Thats not to say I would cringe at a dedicated facebook share button because I would.
    Rumours it does have a 'share' button . Mynd not getting PS4 confirmed. A lot sooner than I would have anticipated..

  25. #174
    Elite Sage
    Two4DaMoney's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2007
    Age
    27
    Posts
    12,449
    Rep Power
    111
    Points
    15,302 (75,576 Banked)
    Items Naughty DogPS3 SlimNaughty DogUser name style
    Achievements IT'S OVER 9000!
    Quote Originally Posted by mynd View Post
    Just want to temper peoples "if a pure gaming machine" expectations, because it wont be.
    It will have its own set of integration in to our increasingly digitally connected word.
    Thats not to say I would cringe at a dedicated facebook share button because I would.
    That's not how owners of a ps3 or psvita truly think about the rumor of "more gaming focused" console. They know Sony won't make the ps4 just a pure gaming machine. That would be going backwards. You have skype and more features on the psvita. dvr on the ps3. They will only build upon those things.

    What I take from the ps4 being "more gamer focused" is that Sony will pick up right off where the ps3 is leaving its stamp. That's continue releasing waves of 1st party exclusives and new i.p's at its core. Then all the other features will be the icing on the cake. As for the 720, rumors are suggesting they are focusing a lot more on OS features and being a cable box/dvr with games being the icing on the cake. Two different paths basically.

    Destiny and Middle Earth: Shadow of Mordor is all I need for the rest of the year.

  26. #175
    Supreme Veteran
    Ixion's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2005
    Location
    New York
    PSN ID
    MagicManGSC
    Age
    24
    Posts
    19,917
    Rep Power
    160
    Points
    69,900 (0 Banked)
    Achievements IT'S OVER 9000!
    Yeah, there's a difference between providing a strong gaming experience along with many other good multi-media features and providing an experience where gaming is of equal importance to the multi-media features.

    That's just speaking in general terms though, as we still don't exactly know what Sony and Microsoft will do.

Thread Information

Users Browsing this Thread

There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
vBCredits II Deluxe v2.1.0 (Pro) - vBulletin Mods & Addons Copyright © 2010-2014 DragonByte Technologies Ltd.