Playstation 4 Or Xbox One? (See mod warning in the first post)

Magill

FAILSAFE 00 wrote: »

I have the best of both worlds, MS are investing money in first party games studios and the power of Microsoft buying game exclusivity.

Microsoft's biggest advantage is that they are swimming in profit so you can't expect them not to use it to their advantage. As an Xbox One owner I am delighted.

This is what happens when a company that previously had dominance in the US gets knocked off the top, they fight back. Fair play to them.

I've seen you bring up MS's success in the rest of its business a lot recently and I don't think you understand how the business world works... this isn't Premier League football where some super rich oil baron buys a club and cares little for how much money he loses.


You think Bill Gates is sitting at home going... awkkk sure my OS market is netting me a fortune... I think i'll buy a couple of games for my Xbox hobby... doesn't matter if the division is losing me hundreds of millions !

FlyingIrishMan

Cormac... wrote: »

Ladies and Gentlemen, from the company that brought you Windows Vista and Windows 8 :rolleyes:

Off-topic, but Windows 8 is damn well optimized and the best Windows OS to date once you get rid of the metro menu.

What were the impressions of Quantum Break? Was the game I was looking forward to most on Xbox One but that show deflated my hype.
You can't actually freeze time yourself.. just does it for you at set spots and you just walk around staged pieces.

FAILSAFE 00

FlyingIrishMan wrote: »

You're still dodging the question.
I'll use a simple analogy since you can't understand it.

Dick has one coin. Harry has no coins.
Tom is going to give a sweet each to Dick and Harry for free.
Dick can use his coin to buy more sweets in the shop, but instead, uses his one coin to buy both sweets from Tom. He then throws one sweet in the bin, and eats the other.
Dick now has no coins.

Understand now? Of course MS can spend different money on first parties, but they can't spend the same money on both.

I'll give you an option 3 though.

3. MS spends money on both, but X-1 is their game count. The -1 being the game they could have developed rather than the Tomb Raider deal.

Why would I answer a question that has 0 basis on reality when Microsoft are investing money in first party studios and securing third party exclusives

Its 2 companies competing against each other. There will be these great moments for both camps when a game is snagged. Its a hell of a statement from Microsoft.

Generic Dreadhead

FlyingIrishMan wrote: »

Off-topic, but Windows 8 is damn well optimized and the best Windows OS to date once you get rid of the metro menu.

Actually yes you are correct.

Back on Topic

FlyingIrishMan

FAILSAFE 00 wrote: »

Why would I answer a question that has 0 basis on reality when Microsoft are investing money in first party studios and securing third party exclusives

I give up... I think you understand what I'm trying to say perfectly, but don't want to answer it because it would make you admit that it's a bad thing for everyone, including Xbox gamers.

heebusjeebus

FAILSAFE 00 wrote: »

Its a hell of a statement from Microsoft.

Ya, it states that it cant invest in it's own IP and needs to money hat to give people reasons to buy the Bone.
Scumbag move IMO.

Otacon

FAILSAFE 00 wrote: »

Why would I answer a question that has 0 basis on reality when Microsoft are investing money in first party studios and securing third party exclusives

MS spent $X on exclusivity for TR.

MS now have BUDGET-X to give to other projects and development opportunities.

Would you prefer that same $X was spent on a new game developed specifically for XBO? Or is buying exclusivity with $X for a game that was already coming to XBO OK with you?

FAILSAFE 00

heebusjeebus wrote: »

Ya, it states that it cant invest in it's own IP and needs to money hat to give people reasons to buy the Bone.
Scumbag move IMO.

You must have missed the show

Microsoft showed off first party games as well what they had bought with the petty cash (exclusivity deals)

Timmyctc

FAILSAFE 00 wrote: »

Why would I answer a question that has 0 basis on reality when Microsoft are investing money in first party studios and securing third party exclusives

Its 2 companies competing against each other. There will be these great moments for both camps when a game is snagged. Its a hell of a statement from Microsoft.

Like. I dunno if you're intentionally not following the conversation or if it is just going over your head. But the point people (Xbox fans, PS fans and PC fans) are making is that the overwhelming opinion is that a company (SONY included) should spend more money and resources on first party titles for their own console instead of spunking an inane amount of money on buying off a AAA title planned for multi plat release.

You seem to think its chump change to do this but consider that tomb raider sold nearly 7 million units (I think). I don't know the specific platform breakdown but Microsoft need to offset the cost deficit that Square Enix will suffer from cutting their potential customer base by 1/3.

While I don't claim to know what margin Enix would claim from the 50-60cost price of the game, its still a fairly substantial figure that could easily have funded some proper first party titles for the xbox instead of spending all this on a game that would have come out, equally as good, on the console for free.

dunworth1

heebusjeebus wrote: »

Ya, it states that it cant invest in it's own IP and needs to money hat to give people reasons to buy the Bone.
Scumbag move IMO.

how does it state that it cant invest?

to me it shows that they are flush with cash to invest

and they have invested look at screamride and quantum break

heebusjeebus

dunworth1 wrote: »

how does it state that it cant invest?

to me it shows that they are flush with cash to invest

and they have invested look at screamride and quantum break

What I was trying to say is that they invest in anything interesting.

FlyingIrishMan

dunworth1 wrote: »

how does it state that it cant invest?

to me it shows that they are flush with cash to invest

and they have invested look at screamride and quantum break

Screamride looks kind of fun, reminds me of Pain. But as with Pain I think it'll getting boring fast.

super_furry

Not an owner of either yet, but when you look at the exclusives for both, I think Xbox One has the advantage.

Generic Dreadhead

Timmyctc wrote: »

While I don't claim to know what margin Enix would claim from the 50-60cost price of the game, its still a fairly substantial figure that could easily have funded some proper first party titles for the xbox instead of spending all this on a game that would have come out, equally as good, on the console for free.

Take your science elsewhere Mr.Science man, this isn't a Logic thread :pac::pac:

FlyingIrishMan

Timmyctc wrote: »

You seem to think its chump change to do this but consider that tomb raider sold nearly 7 million units (I think). I don't know the specific platform breakdown but Microsoft need to offset the cost deficit that Square Enix will suffer from cutting their potential customer base by 1/3.

They're cutting their potential base by a lot more than a 1/3. I'd assume the PS4 would be around 17-18million sold by holiday season next year, PC users are another couple of hundred million users.
They're basically releasing to as few people as they can possibly release it to. That was one hell of a check MS must have paid, and definitely a lot more than "petty cash".

Timmyctc

dunworth1 wrote: »

how does it state that it cant invest?

to me it shows that they are flush with cash to invest

and they have invested look at screamride and quantum break

Lads I hope yer doing this on purpose but like. Come on now. Ye cant be that dense.

Microsoft is not an endless pit of money. They are spending this money to make more money by getting more people to buy the X1. They arent spending from the good in their hearts.

The general consensus is that they have spent the money in the wrong place in this occasion.

Or to dumb it down beyond what Otacon did earlier.

MICROSOFT HAVE 5 MONIES. ENIX OFFER TOMB RAIDER TO 3 PEOPLE INCLUDING X1.
MICROSOFT SPEND 3 MONIES MAKING ENIX GIVE THE 3 COPIES TO MICROSOFT.

MICROSOFT COMES HOME AND GETS INTO BED WITH FAILSAFE.
MICROSOFT IS A GENTLE AND TENDER LOVER.

Timmyctc

FlyingIrishMan wrote: »

They're cutting their potential base by a lot more than a 1/3. I'd assume the PS4 would be around 17-18million sold by holiday season next year, PC users are another couple of hundred million users.

Giving the benefit of the doubt (Massively) to X1 in my estimations

ems_medic

Timmyctc wrote: »

The general consensus is that they have spent the money in the wrong place in this occasion.

No that would be the consensus of PS4 owners who obviously aren't going to be happy at losing out playing a great IP such as Tomb Raider.

I guess this is one of the benefits of being an owner of a console lagging in sales, the leader becomes complacent while the lagger becomes hungrier.

dunworth1

Timmyctc wrote: »

The general consensus is that they have spent the money in the wrong place in this occasion.

.

The general consensus ahem. the only people who seem to think that are Ps4 owners

xbox owners are delighted

FAILSAFE 00

Timmyctc wrote: »

Lads I hope yer doing this on purpose but like. Come on now. Ye cant be that dense.

Microsoft is not an endless pit of money. They are spending this money to make more money by getting more people to buy the X1. They arent spending from the good in their hearts.

The general consensus is that they have spent the money in the wrong place in this occasion.

Or to dumb it down beyond what Otacon did earlier.

MICROSOFT HAVE 5 MONIES. ENIX OFFER TOMB RAIDER TO 3 PEOPLE INCLUDING X1.
MICROSOFT SPEND 3 MONIES MAKING ENIX GIVE THE 3 COPIES TO MICROSOFT.

MICROSOFT COMES HOME AND GETS INTO BED WITH FAILSAFE.
MICROSOFT IS A GENTLE AND TENDER LOVER.

The general consensus here is people are not happy that Tomb Raider is only coming to Xbox One

Microsoft have a tonne of profit unlike Sony so of course they are going to use it to secure a game that will generate more sales for them.

Timmyctc

ems_medic wrote: »

No that would be the consensus of PS4 owners who obviously aren't going to be happy at losing out playing a great IP such as Tomb Raider.

I'm not exclusively talking about this particular boards thread. I'm talking about in general. I couldn't care less FWIW I thought it was a poor attempt at copying Uncharted and actually never finished the game.

ems_medic

Timmyctc wrote: »

I'm not exclusively talking about this particular boards thread. I'm talking about in general. I couldn't care less FWIW I thought it was a poor attempt at copying Uncharted and actually never finished the game.

Being honest, I'm not really seeing any general consensus on any website other than from PS4 users, though if you have links would be great

GottaGetGatt

So of the people who are upset about this not being released on the the PS4 , have you actually played the first game?

Grayditch

GottaGetGatt wrote: »

So of the people who are upset about this not being released on the the PS4 , have you actually played the first game?

I wouldn't say I'm upset or anything but I thought the first game was class.

Maybe not class enough to get an Xbox for the sequel, depending on how it plays out. Xbox still needs more games.

Penn

GottaGetGatt wrote: »

So of the people who are upset about this not being released on the the PS4 , have you actually played the first game?

I played the PS4 port of the previous game. It was alright. Good graphics, gameplay was alright. I enjoyed it.

Traded it in after less than a week though. No interest in playing through again, no interest in multiplayer. Obviously, the next game will be built for the new gen, so there'll be a bump in graphics and scale of the game. They'll also likely fix some of the flaws from the last game. I'm really not that fussed about not getting to play it though. It's not the IP/franchise it once was, the gameplay in it is nothing special, and the characters and story were fairly dull.

I still maintain it's a big get for Microsoft. But for me, it doesn't really change anything.

johnny_ultimate

Just a reminder of the warning from the other day - please resist the temptation to overuse gifs and jpgs instead of actually discussing the points. They've been clogging up the thread recently, and more often than not add nothing to the discussion (not to mention the vast majority of them are incredibly overused). If they're pointless, we'll likely snip them. If you're using them as cheeky or flamebaiting posts against other posters, you'll likely receive a warning or infraction. Thanks, your assistance as ever is much appreciated!

tok9

Played the first one when we got it free on PS+

Thought it was an entertaining but flawed game with some of the worst QTEs I've ever seen. Also a serious lack of tombs

But it was fun. It wouldn't be the reason I'd get an Xbox. Still I think that would be the Halo collection.

I was looking forward to more on QB but I've been left a bit disappointed from what they showed today.

Otacon

GottaGetGatt wrote: »

So of the people who are upset about this not being released on the the PS4 , have you actually played the first game?

I played the first. Enjoyed it. Was looking forward to the sequel.

Guess I won't get to play it now.

Zero-Cool

Agree with Penn, played the last one, wasn't anything special. The exclusivity is annoying to me as I owned all the Playstation TR's since the 1st one in '96. Sickened now not to have the chance to play the new one. I'd prefer to play the new TR than the new Uncharted but I'm sure Uncharted 4 will still be class.

NotorietyH

If they had announcned a bundle with the Master Chief collection for €400 that could nearly have been enough for me to jump on board. Though still not enough exclusive-wise to justify having both PS4 and Xbox One at the moment for me.