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

COYVB

Grumpypants wrote: »

They have updated it, they had the xbox one version with the release date above it, but now its been changed to coming soon and the date is abpove the 360 version. I guess it was meant for a Gamescom reveal

Or, you're reading too much into it?

Richard Dower

ffs!.....another fail and another reason to buy the PS4 :mad:

http://onehitpixel.com/2013/08/07/xbox-ones-game-recording-features-restricted-to-xbox-live-gold-members/48066

Grayditch

Meh.

Richard Dower

Grayditch wrote: »

Meh.

It gets worse.......http://www.engadget.com/2013/08/07/xbox-one-xbox-live-gold/

FAILSAFE 00

Richard Dower wrote: »

It gets worse.......http://www.engadget.com/2013/08/07/xbox-one-xbox-live-gold/

It doesn't. Who is going to pay 500 euro and not have a gold membership. That's like renting time on the track at mondello park and then not renting a car to drive on it.

1ZRed

FAILSAFE 00 wrote: »

It doesn't. Who is going to pay 500 euro and not have a gold membership. That's like renting time on the track at mondello park and then not renting a car to drive on it.

People who have no interest in online games but would still like to use services like Netflix that aren't locked behind a paywall?

Plus if your sub ran out for a while and you couldn't afford it just yet it'd be great if you could play FTP games at no charge in the meantime.

Grayditch

FAILSAFE 00 wrote: »

It doesn't. Who is going to pay 500 euro and not have a gold membership. That's like renting time on the track at mondello park and then not renting a car to drive on it.

Not really. It's more like driving around it on your own, which in fairness some people would prefer to do.

FAILSAFE 00

Grayditch wrote: »

Not really. It's more like driving around it on your own, which in fairness some people would prefer to do.

if people don't want to play multiplayer then I'd recommend they get the PS4 then with the price difference and more accessibility to apps with the PSN plus. It makes more sense for offline players.

Grayditch

I don't see the video thing being an issue, really. People who want to get into the social side of video sharing etc will probably have Xbox live.

Regarding the apps, though, I sign up to PS Plus because well, it's incredible value, but there are times it's ran out before pay day and it would annoy me if I couldn't use Netflix in that time.

GottaGetGatt

Grayditch wrote: »

I don't see the video thing being an issue, really. People who want to get into the social side of video sharing etc will probably have Xbox live.

Regarding the apps, though, I sign up to PS Plus because well, it's incredible value, but there are times it's ran out before pay day and it would annoy me if I couldn't use Netflix in that time.

Can you launch or even look at the netflix library when the PS plus runs out?

shreddedloops

GottaGetGatt wrote: »

Can you launch or even look at the netflix library when the PS plus runs out?

Presume you're talking about PS4.
I'm pretty sure Sony have stated that PS+ won't be needed for services like Netflix.

Grayditch

GottaGetGatt wrote: »

Can you launch or even look at the netflix library when the PS plus runs out?

Yeah, sure. You can play games online too, although that will change with PS4. Some games won't require PS Plus to play online.

I wasn't even slightly disappointed to find out PS4 will need plus to play online, the amount of games they give you is impressive.

SherlockWatson

shreddedloops wrote: »

Presume you're talking about PS4.
I'm pretty sure Sony have stated that PS+ won't be needed for services like Netflix.

Yeah, you only need PS+ for online multiplayer, the services like Netflix are usable without it.

1ZRed

Grayditch wrote: »

Yeah, sure. You can play games online too, although that will change with PS4. Some games won't require PS Plus to play online.

I wasn't even slightly disappointed to find out PS4 will need plus to play online, the amount of games they give you is impressive.

See I'm on PS+, anyone with a PS3 would be stupid not to, and I'll definitely be staying subbed, but that said, I was annoyed you had to pay for it. It was the handiest thing not having to pay out €50 annually on online play that's free everywhere else. They only did it because they saw xbox fans would gladly pay €50 for party chat and now look, it's mandatory.

God knows what the PS4 would be like if the DRM on the X1 was welcomed, or at least tolerated.

Grayditch

I don't want to come across as a fan boy, but Sony have made the gaming environment a lot better for everyone by buttering up to gamers.

If they had followed suit on Microsoft's restrictions, things would have just gotten worse. You give them an inch and they'll take a yard next time.

C14N

FAILSAFE 00 wrote: »

It doesn't. Who is going to pay 500 euro and not have a gold membership. That's like renting time on the track at mondello park and then not renting a car to drive on it.

If I had bought an Xbox One, I wouldn't have paid for Gold membership. If I ever get one, I still won't because I would rather take that €60 a year and get 2-3 games out of it.

FAILSAFE 00 wrote: »

if people don't want to play multiplayer then I'd recommend they get the PS4 then with the price difference and more accessibility to apps with the PSN plus. It makes more sense for offline players.

This is true but it's a bad thing when you can objectively say that anyone not interested in playing online is much better off on the other console. Non-subscribers still make up almost half of the 360's owner-base. It's just going to be off-putting when you put the two side-by-side and see that one charges you a subscription for many features that the other gives for free.

1ZRed wrote: »

See I'm on PS+, anyone with a PS3 would be stupid not to, and I'll definitely be staying subbed, but that said, I was annoyed you had to pay for it. It was the handiest thing not having to pay out €50 annually on online play that's free everywhere else. They only did it because they saw xbox fans would gladly pay €50 for party chat and now look, it's mandatory.

I'm not subbed really because PS3 is my second console (PC is first) and I have a massive list of games I need to play without Sony adding more every month. However, I think Sony wanted to charge for PS subs from the start, it's just that it would have been another hurdle for Sony to fall over on the PS3 launch. They could market free online as a selling point, even though it wasn't as reliable as XBL, which had a year of getting the hang of it.

FAILSAFE 00

C14N wrote: »

If I had bought an Xbox One, I wouldn't have paid for Gold membership. If I ever get one, I still won't because I would rather take that €60 a year and get 2-3 games out of it.

I'd be very impressed if you could get 2-3 Xbox One/ PS4 games for €60. Even second hand they will still be really expensive.

If gaming offline is someone's thing then PS4 is their best bet. Unless there are offline exclusives that a gamer really wants to play on xbox one.

Otacon

FAILSAFE 00 wrote: »

I'd be very impressed if you could get 2-3 Xbox One/ PS4 games for €60. Even second hand they will still be really expensive.

I think you will be able to do it easily if you concentrate on downloadable or indie titles. The 2-3 figure may even be conservative.

1ZRed

C14N wrote: »

If I had bought an Xbox One, I wouldn't have paid for Gold membership. If I ever get one, I still won't because I would rather take that €60 a year and get 2-3 games out of it.



This is true but it's a bad thing when you can objectively say that anyone not interested in playing online is much better off on the other console. Non-subscribers still make up almost half of the 360's owner-base. It's just going to be off-putting when you put the two side-by-side and see that one charges you a subscription for many features that the other gives for free.



I'm not subbed really because PS3 is my second console (PC is first) and I have a massive list of games I need to play without Sony adding more every month. However, I think Sony wanted to charge for PS subs from the start, it's just that it would have been another hurdle for Sony to fall over on the PS3 launch. They could market free online as a selling point, even though it wasn't as reliable as XBL, which had a year of getting the hang of it.

I dunno, it's free everywhere else like on PC. I think they saw xbox users didn't care about spending money on it so they probably said they'd be foolish not to if they can get away with it this time. The fact that PS+ is so good makes a lot of people begrudgingly overlook it, me included.

PSN will have all the xbox online features now so really there's not going to be a difference between them. The only difference is if Microsoft can match PS+ on games, which I doubt given their half assed attempt so far. I think that'll be the biggest factor in swaying people considering party chat and all that is there now.

Dravokivich

GottaGetGatt wrote: »

Can you launch or even look at the netflix library when the PS plus runs out?

You don't need to be subscribed to PSN+ for any online media services. Only to use additional PSN services.

I don't like the idea of having to pay for Xbox Live in order to access a service not provided by Microsoft.

NTMK

1ZRed wrote: »

I dunno, it's free everywhere else like on PC. I think they saw xbox users didn't care about spending money on it so they probably said they'd be foolish not to if they can get away with it this time. The fact that PS+ is so good makes a lot of people begrudgingly overlook it, me included.

PSN will have all the xbox online features now so really there's not going to be a difference between them. The only difference is if Microsoft can match PS+ on games, which I doubt given their half assed attempt so far. I think that'll be the biggest factor in swaying people considering party chat and all that is there now.

PS+ was a great marketing play by sony and was great for the subs too

PS+ on the PS3 was designed to get people used to paying for online content before the PS4 announcement to minimise a backlash

how could sony not want a piece of xbox live's money

xbox live has 46mill subs @ say €30 (my guess at the average money taken by ms for each yearly sub) is:

€1.38 billion gross yearly

what business would want that kind of money spinner

COYVB

NTMK wrote: »

PS+ was a great marketing play by sony and was great for the subs too

Wasn't good enough, given that so few people know about it outside the more core gamers

Newaglish

COYVB wrote: »

Wasn't good enough, given that so few people know about it outside the more core gamers

What makes you say that?

Dravokivich

Newaglish wrote: »

What makes you say that?

After E3, when Microsoft announced a few free games in the run up to the launch of the Xbox One, a lot of people were surprised to find out it's been part of the PSN+ service for a long time.

FlyingIrishMan

Dravokivich wrote: »

After E3, when Microsoft announced a few free games in the run up to the launch of the Xbox One, a lot of people were surprised to find out it's been part of the PSN+ service for a long time.

I never saw anyone that was surprised.

Dravokivich

FlyingIrishMan wrote: »

I never saw anyone that was surprised.

Well that's fine for you then. But there was a lot of commentary about it at the time. Even in the PSN+ thread on the playstation forum a lot of new people to it, tend to be unsure of what exactly it is. Make of it what you want from that...

Grayditch

I still surprise people I talk to when I tell them what you get with PS Plus. Two of my mates signed up for Battlefield and XCom last month, and they hate paying for anything. Actually, if you think about it, PS Plus is perfect for people on a budget.

tok9

Grayditch wrote: »

Actually, if you think about it, PS Plus is perfect for people on a budget.

Just fixing that for you :P

COYVB

Newaglish wrote: »

What makes you say that?

The fact that so few people know about it outside the more core gamers

ShadowHearth

I was actually re/thinking on what to get first. I got ps4 booked for ages and 300eu payed out so far. ( it would not be a problem to switch in local gamestop ). The reason of re/thinking is Forza. I really love the series.

So I started thinking:

I already pay ps+ subscription, so it is handy for ps4, because I already use ps3 and vita.
I own already PS vita so Cross play is something that I would use ALOT! I love to play 3ds/ps vita in bed. If I can play BF4 in my bed, while misses watching her crap on TV, then it would be win - win situation for me.
I already like PS4 UI more. Its just personal preference, not just because its better or worse.
The price. This is interesting one. I am not so great financially at the moment. I now now that I need just 100eu and I got ps4 payed off. If I would go for xbox one, then it would mean 200eu and thats before games and second controller. I know some people say that 100eu is not a lot and makes no difference in choice, but not for me. 100eu would mean 2 extra games or a game and 1 year sub for PS+. ( a bit more then 100eu, i know ).
I love PS+ service. This service alone has a huge impact on my decision.

So I scraped Idea about xbox one. Yes, MS did a switch for the better since we sow it announced, but it is still an inferior package for me. Still going with ps4 as first console and getting xbox one later on when I can financially.
I honestly did not knew that 100eu difference could have so much weight in decision too. When both consoles pretty much identical it does not make sense to pay that extra.