How will you choose between MS & Sony's new consoles?

C14N

circadian wrote: »

When you buy a second hand car, does the manufacturer get money from that?
Not that I'm aware.

If I buy a second hand t-shirt, does the manufacturer get a cut of that in any way? No.

Well it's a highly debatable topic really. A videogame isn't quite like a car or a t-shirt because there is the fact that once you've used it once (assuming single player game), there's a very good chance you won't use it again which makes it a lot easier to part with. You don't "finish" with your T-shirt or car.

There is also the old thing question of the value of intellectual property that comes up so much in piracy debates. With a car or t-shirt, a lot of the value is in the raw materials. You paid for the materials and then you sell them. With a game, the value is in man-hours that went into creating the intellectual property. It's a sticky discussion but I'm just making the point that I don't think it's as cut-and-dry as "I bought it so I can sell it". I know it's generally illegal to sell on books too but that's not strictly policed in any way.

stevenmu wrote: »

The PS4 seems like it's very much an incremental update to the PS3. Tbh the PS3s graphics are plenty good enough for most purposes, the improvement that the PS4 brings doesn't seem worth the price of upgrading.

This is a rather confusing attitude to take Games consoles aren't really the kind of thing where you can just say "no no, I don't need another console, the graphics I have now are fine". It's not a question of the graphics being worth an update. A year or so after this generation launches, they're going to just stop making games on PS3 and 360.

Cienciano wrote: »

Good one, I think PC gamers are turning into the worst fanboys!

I think we've been the worst for a while. We've sort of descended into William Shatner ironic self-parody at this stage.

shruikan2553 wrote: »

Why have so much of the event being EA sports and call of duty? We know they will be on it so I dont see how I'm meant to be excited about that.

That's a good point. Did they really think anyone anywhere was going to say "holy shhit this thing will have Call of Duty AND Madden? I did not see that coming!"? They're all games that we just expect to be there and no matter what you do with them, aren't going to be overly impressive for a console launch.

ShadowHearth wrote: »

To be honest, I can really see a lot of people shifting to PC gaming. There are plenty of people on the fence and Xbox ONE crippled that fence and not in to console side

I was kind of thinking this myself. Obviously it won't happen to a mainstream degree but I think a lot of people who play and discuss games a lot could be pushed toward it, especially now with Steam making it so much easier to get into.

Eli Manning wrote: »

I'd try PC gaming if I wasn't saving for a car. It just appears that the initial set up is expernsive or otherwise you'll be pulling useless parts out of your machine in a year due to upgrades.

A lot of people assume this but I think it's something of a fallacy. It doesn't help that loads of PC gaming sites love to do regular articles of "Best $10,000 PC" or whatever and how we PC gamers get such hard-ons for ridiculously priced hardware and graphical power.

Really though, you can build a PC that will play anything quite cheaply (at least when you consider that you're getting a free computer with it) and building it is not nearly as hard or as scary as it sounds (it's almost all just slotting stuff into place and the only tool I've ever used is one screwdriver). Alternatively, if you have a desktop anyway, you can usually just stick in a €150 graphics card and that will play anything, certainly if you have a monitor 22" or smaller (and most people do). You only need to upgrade regularly if you want to keep maxing settings, otherwise it should survive as long as a console and look at least as good as the current gen of consoles. The games are all dirt cheap too.

Courtesy Flush

I think its fair to say XBox One and MS vision has blown PS out of the water already. The battle was always going to be about taking over the living room, so to speak.

C14N

Courtesy Flush wrote: »

I think its fair to say XBox One and MS vision has blown PS out of the water already. The battle was always going to be about taking over the living room, so to speak.

*not sure if trolling...*

Deano7788

Courtesy Flush wrote: »

I think its fair to say XBox One and MS vision has blown PS out of the water already. The battle was always going to be about taking over the living room, so to speak.

Yeah, that's definitely the feeling so far in this thread....

Courtesy Flush

Gott wrote: »

While I have grown very fond of my Xbox, the reveal for the Xbox One was ... underwhelming to say the least.

I don't want an integrated home entertainment system and Halo TV series, I'd be quite content with an excellent games console.

I might actually turn to the Dark Side and become PC Master Race.

I think that many gamers will want the best , most powerful system they can get , many purists will go for a PC. Top line PC will always be more powerful than a console
What Microsoft and Sony are trying to do is create an all round entertainment system, interact with devices, live in The Cloud etc.... This is no longer just about games
It will be a battle but MS seems to have invested a lot more in that space

ahnowbrowncow

Courtesy Flush wrote: »

I think that many gamers will want the best , most powerful system they can get

And it's confirmed that the Ps4 is a lot more powerful than the Xbox One so going by your theory the ps4 will be far more successful.

Dyr

But the xbox will have 23% extra clouds and TV

circadian

Bambi wrote: »

But the xbox will have 23% extra clouds and TV

I think you forgot to mention it has TV.

Yousef

Eli Manning wrote: »

I'd try PC gaming if I wasn't saving for a car. It just appears that the initial set up is expernsive or otherwise you'll be pulling useless parts out of your machine in a year due to upgrades.

You had a go at me yesterday about PC gaming and yet now you reveal you don't even play on PC.

Anyway, FYI....PC's don't have to be expensive. What are you going to buy these new consoles for? The best part of 400 or 500 quid? And for what? Hardware that will already be outdated even when it's launched nevermind having to use the same hardware for the next how many years?

Meanwhile, you can update your PC as you go along. You might spend 100 quid every two or three years (you don't have to) to upgrade it. Taking out a part and putting in another one is simple really and I'm anything but well up on these computer thingy majigs....

That 100 is nothing when you take in what you're spending on these consoles yearly in form of pay to play online (PC is free), overpriced games (PC has Steam and eh....Russian *cough cough*). It's a bit of an investment perhaps at the start but you'll end up paying a hell of a lot less over the years with a PC (as well as having a far greater experience) than you will with these consoles.

If the consoles features i.e - TV, Music etc interest you....then just download XBMC or Valve's Big Picture for PC. It's exactly the same as the Xbox "desktop" screen and you can control it in your living room while sitting on the couch with an XB or PS controller. So throw your new PC in your living room and you'll have every single movie you ever wanted for FREE, every song you'll ever want to play for FREE, you can even watch movies still in the cinema, download any game for pennies on Steam.

PC is just a far better way to go. I'm not a PC elitist. I'm a realist and it seems now that there has never been a better time to get one. Save yourself some money dude.

Courtesy Flush

Looks like we will have to wait till E3 to see the games.
They did say 15 new titles for Xbox One afaik

tuxy

Courtesy Flush wrote: »

Looks like we will have to wait till E3 to see the games.
They did say 15 new titles for Xbox One afaik

11 of them will be dance games for the kinect.

K.O.Kiki

tuxy wrote: »

I think manufacturers lose money on every console sold when a system is new.
They then make money by taking a cut from all new game sales. This inflates the cost of games.

Only looking at the hardware is not taking the full picture into account.

Nintendo have never lost a cent on a console.

Pushtrak

K.O.Kiki wrote: »

Nintendo have never lost a cent on a console.

Well, with the Wii U, they've had the least profitable even from launch from what I understand... Specifically, they are profitable with one game sold with the system.... Which is as minor a distinction as makes very little relevance. Though, I haven't been keeping up with things. With the reduction in price, it may be unprofitable. As I say, though, not been keeping track.

ShadowHearth

By the way lads. Is it me or Xbox got it self even further away from Japan market? So far New Xbox just screams off "america! **** yeah!" " for the Bro's!!!". As we know Xbox in Japan is very unpopular, western games even less.

Retr0gamer

Wouldn't be surprised if MS abandoned the Japanese market. The console is huge which is a big no no for the japanese and the home console market is nearly dead over there, it's all handheld. The 360 was only really popular there with the uber nerdy Otaku and most of the games on it were either filthy pandering crap like Gal Gun, bullet hell shooters from the likes of Cave or the odd non-erotic visual novel which ended up getting a PSP port anyway like Steins;Gate.

NTMK

ShadowHearth wrote: »

By the way lads. Is it me or Xbox got it self even further away from Japan market? So far New Xbox just screams off "america! **** yeah!" " for the Bro's!!!". As we know Xbox in Japan is very unpopular, western games even less.

Japan is a locked down market. American products never do well there. MS understandably have given up on it

I expected MS to focus on europe because its the closest market for consoles

and they ended up showing features that will not be available in europe

ShadowHearth

NTMK wrote: »

Japan is a locked down market. American products never do well there. MS understandably have given up on it

I expected MS to focus on europe because its the closest market for consoles

And they ended up showing features that will not be available in europe

Well all that TV shiet is based on cable boxes? You need to cable box in the first place for it to work. Europe is more focused on satellite TV then cable I presume. So probably our cable network is not going to be worth to invest to for MS.

Retr0gamer

Here's MS's second hand sales solution. I don't see retail being happy about this and they could even boycott the system like the PSPGo.

http://www.mcvuk.com/news/read/publishers-to-receive-cut-of-xbox-one-pre-owned-sales-at-retail/0116137

PhlegmyMoses

Retr0gamer wrote: »

The console is huge which is a big no no for the japanese

They bought the original PS3 which must the biggest console I've ever owned. But yeah, MS surely know that the Japanese market is a no-go area. They sold **** all 360s in Asia.

ShadowHearth

Retr0gamer wrote: »

Here's MS's second hand sales solution. I don't see retail being happy about this and they could even boycott the system like the PSPGo.

http://www.mcvuk.com/news/read/publishers-to-receive-cut-of-xbox-one-pre-owned-sales-at-retail/0116137

So... You cant really sell games on adverts anymore and its going to completely unprofitable to high street vendors to even bother with second hand game market?

MS wants to ba a STEAM of console world, but problem is PC has no generations. The game I bought on steam 6 years ago is perfectly playable today. To make it even better I use same account for 3 different machines so far and there will be even more machines or configurations in the future.

I am really worried now that PS3 might be doing same or will be bullied by publishers to do it same way MS did.

Retr0gamer

PhlegmyMoses wrote: »

They bought the original PS3 which must the biggest console I've ever owned. But yeah, MS surely know that the Japanese market is a no-go area. They sold **** all 360s in Asia.

Check the sales figures for PS3. They aren't that impressive in Japan. Only 8-9 million sold in it's lifetime.

Dravokivich

Retr0gamer wrote: »

Here's MS's second hand sales solution. I don't see retail being happy about this and they could even boycott the system like the PSPGo.

http://www.mcvuk.com/news/read/publishers-to-receive-cut-of-xbox-one-pre-owned-sales-at-retail/0116137

I don't get why they consistently make reference to people who bring a game to a mates should sign on with their own profile. When a big part of the debate about the viability of the xboxone is around the need for it to be online. What if my mate doesn't have internet? This point seems to be missed in all the articles I've seen on it.

Azza

If if he doesn't have an internet connection there be little point in him having an Xbox One in the first place.

Varik

Dravokivich wrote: »

What if my mate doesn't have internet? This point seems to be missed in all the articles I've seen on it.

if the mate didn't have a internet connection then they would be little point in having a Xbox one as the thing needs to connected once per 24hr.

ShadowHearth

Varik wrote: »

if the mate didn't have a internet connection then they would be little point in having a Xbox one as the thing needs to connected once per 24hr.

We might as well now call it "always connected" instead of being once 24h connection... :rolleyes:

Mitch Connor

on the 'fee' front - going to wait to see what MS officially announce - reckon there is a lot of assumptions mixed up in a good deal of truth. Having to be a registered partner, using this MS system and the game being wiped from your account post trade in make perfect sense, business wise. The 10% cut to retailers and the £35 fee make no sense to me - it would mean there is no market at all, it simply would not be financially viable, making it a pointless exercise imo.

ahnowbrowncow

Mitch Connor wrote: »

on the 'fee' front - going to wait to see what MS officially announce - reckon there is a lot of assumptions mixed up in a good deal of truth. Having to be a registered partner, using this MS system and the game being wiped from your account post trade in make perfect sense, business wise. The 10% cut to retailers and the £35 fee make no sense to me - it would mean there is no market at all, it simply would not be financially viable, making it a pointless exercise imo.

Is that not the point of it?

ShadowHearth

Mitch Connor wrote: »

on the 'fee' front - going to wait to see what MS officially announce - reckon there is a lot of assumptions mixed up in a good deal of truth. Having to be a registered partner, using this MS system and the game being wiped from your account post trade in make perfect sense, business wise. The 10% cut to retailers and the £35 fee make no sense to me - it would mean there is no market at all, it simply would not be financially viable, making it a pointless exercise imo.

I think that is what MS and publishers wanted in the first place.

Varik

ShadowHearth wrote: »

We might as well now call it "always connected" instead of being once 24h connection... :rolleyes:

It is a little better than always on, at least it can handle a short term disconnect.

CiDeRmAn

I will, over the course of 2014, wind up buying both of them.
But I am underwhelmed by the pair of them with little to differentiate as yet between the games on these and on the current gen consoles.
However, if either launch lineup is sufficiently impressive it'll be bought at launch.

I'm not sure my ps3 and 360 will be pleased with going into retirement, in my games room.
This could be a touchy subject.... might have to break the news to them gently.

Thing is, looking at my current games backlog, it's unlikely I'll clear them all by the time the new machines are bought!
I haven't even started Skyrim yet, never mind Dishonored!