Deader2818
CAGiversary!
- Feedback
- 31 (100%)
Should I skip the first Infamous and go to 2 or should I play both?
PlayStation 4 - General Discussion Thread
- Thread starter KillerRamen
- Start date
TimboSliceGB
CAGiversary!
- Feedback
- 1 (100%)
both are great and must plays
gow ascension was awful game it was nothing more then a rushed product to get the last dime out of the franchise on ps3 before ps4 came out which was a case for alot of games coming out this year.
This is very interesting
http://m.ign.com/articles/2013/06/26/sony-sacrificed-the-playstation-4-camera-to-beat-microsoft-on-price
When Sony announced that PlayStation 4 would be priced at $399 to an uproar of applause from the audience at its E3 press conference, it secured a critical edge over the Xbox One. But the advantage came at a cost: the PlayStation 4 camera. According to multiple sources, in the months leading up to E3, Sony nixed plans to include the camera add-on with every system and shave $100 off it's originally planned price of $499. Most importantly, it did so quietly, informing its retail partners only of the removal of the camera, not specifying the lower price so as not to tip its hand to Microsoft.
But in its efforts to undercut the Xbox One, Sony has damned the accessory to a future of fragmented consumer adoption and inconsistent software support. The decision has also rendered a major design element of the DualShock 4 controller — the built-in LED Move tracker — largely useless.
Microsoft's decision to bundle a Kinect with each Xbox One and require it for use may be unpopular, but it guarantees that every user will have the option to try Kinect-enabled games and experiences. For developers, it means that Kinect integration is no longer a costly gamble on a small subsection of Xbox owners — motion-detecting and voice-sensing elements can be anything from a small optional game enhancement or the primary control method.
http://m.ign.com/articles/2013/06/26/sony-sacrificed-the-playstation-4-camera-to-beat-microsoft-on-price
When Sony announced that PlayStation 4 would be priced at $399 to an uproar of applause from the audience at its E3 press conference, it secured a critical edge over the Xbox One. But the advantage came at a cost: the PlayStation 4 camera. According to multiple sources, in the months leading up to E3, Sony nixed plans to include the camera add-on with every system and shave $100 off it's originally planned price of $499. Most importantly, it did so quietly, informing its retail partners only of the removal of the camera, not specifying the lower price so as not to tip its hand to Microsoft.
But in its efforts to undercut the Xbox One, Sony has damned the accessory to a future of fragmented consumer adoption and inconsistent software support. The decision has also rendered a major design element of the DualShock 4 controller — the built-in LED Move tracker — largely useless.
Microsoft's decision to bundle a Kinect with each Xbox One and require it for use may be unpopular, but it guarantees that every user will have the option to try Kinect-enabled games and experiences. For developers, it means that Kinect integration is no longer a costly gamble on a small subsection of Xbox owners — motion-detecting and voice-sensing elements can be anything from a small optional game enhancement or the primary control method.
Erad30
CAGiversary!
Well clearly the camera wasn't as integral to their strategy. I think I remember it being briefly mentioned at the Feb unveiling, but we never saw any games or functionality attached to it. Kinect also sold incredibly wel. If it was a utter failure I doubt we'd be seeing a 2.0. And it is a different beast than Kinect, which is trying to be some sort of all in one camera/motion sensor/mic/heart monitor/secret government spy tool. Not that I'm getting either at launch, but I've listed my numerous issues with the system and if Kinect was the only one I don't think that many people would be bitching about it.
blueweltall
CAGiversary!
- Feedback
- 169 (100%)
I am fine with this move by Sony since it brought the system cost down to $400. I wish Microsoft would do the same with the Xbox one. I never really used my eye camera or Kinect. None of these motion camera thing has dramatically changed the way I play as a gamer. I never played a AAA game and wished it has motion camera sensor incorporated in its gameplay. These things might be great for the casual gamer but for a hardcore gamer, as myself, I can live without it.
Last edited by a moderator:
I'm super happy they made that move as I loathe motion controls and voice commands in games. Kinect being packed in is one of the main reasons I'm sticking with my PS4 preorder even after MS dropped DRM. Kinect being packed in no doubt means that stuff will get shoe horned into a lot of games, where as with Eye not packed in it will be left for games built around it like Dance Central etc. which is how it should be IMO.
I want to do nothing but lounge on the couch and press buttons when gaming. Gaming is my veg out and relax time. I get plenty of exercise from my running, lifting, walking the dogs etc. and have no interest in motion controls period.
I want to do nothing but lounge on the couch and press buttons when gaming. Gaming is my veg out and relax time. I get plenty of exercise from my running, lifting, walking the dogs etc. and have no interest in motion controls period.
8bitArtist
CAGiversary!
- Feedback
- 4 (100%)
motion controls are terrible. id never buy the ps eye anyway. glad they did that.
I'm surprised they got the PS4 to be slightly smaller than the PS3 Slim and have the power supply built-in. Crazy engineering on Sony's part.
That's not sacrificing tech, it's still there! It's not like they canned the whole thing. The difference is that they aren't forcing you to buy the camera, when that's all MS is doing. They can preach the whole "value" thing until they're blue in the face, and I do realize that they built XB1 around having the Kinect on, but it still should not be a necessity. I mean, they sold enough of 1.0 to realize that they don't need to make people buy 2.0 for it to be a commercial success.
Sony has it right this time - If you like motion controls or being active in front of a camera, the option is there. You can still buy a PS4, Eye 3.0 and a 12mo. PS+ subscription for only $10 more than an XB1. And then you're still without LIVE! And until I see one right in front of me doing everything exactly how it's been advertised, I'll remain skeptical that Kinect 2.0 does everything the way it's supposed to. No thanks, MS, you can keep your "value".
Spot on I might be old but when I want to game exercise I will pull out my NES pad and play track and field the only motion controller that I have ever liked.
ShockandAww
CAGiversary!
- Feedback
- 110 (100%)
I'd much, much rather pay $100 less and have the option to buy the $60 camera separately. I'm guessing that goes for a majority of gamers.
Also sticking to facts which I know is hard for you when it comes to X1/PS4, there are other uses for that light bar. A Health indicator for example. So exactly how useful something like that will be is up in the air, but to say it has no use other than tracking is incorrect. Par for the course WV try harder.
Last edited by a moderator:
unless you are really into storylines in game, there is really not need to play the first infamous, because infamous 2 will caught you up on what happened in the first game.
Gamer4life88
CAGiversary!
- Feedback
- 61 (100%)
Same here man, and I don't want to talk to my TV or wave my arms at it to change from games to music or whatever. Glad Sony gave us an option instead of forcing it and an extra $100 on us. I'm not buying a Xbox One until they flip another swicth and remove the mandatory Kinect.
There's a difference between sacrificing and enforcing. Sony's decision was to not enforce developers or consumers to make use of motion controls or the camera. This to me is smart because motion gaming has already proven to be just a gimmick and doesn't belong in every single game. Where it makes sense, developers are free to explore it naturally and the gamers that wish to try it can do so for the additional cash.
Once again M$ is deciding what's 'best' for gamers by pushing kinect on every user, whether they want it or not. This kind of strong-arm tactic will not do them any favors, so if you were to weigh the two: I think Sony wins this one despite 'sacrificing' what is IMO an unnecessary tech.
Last edited by a moderator:
GamerDude316
CAGiversary!
- Feedback
- 22 (100%)
Yep, exactly. Those who want to have motion games can still get the Eye separately. Personally I don't like motion controls at all aside from Wii Sports so the idea of saving $100 and not watching Eye get shoehorned into every game like Kinect will be is a win for this gamer.
Yep, exactly. Those who want to have motion games can still get the Eye separately. Personally I don't like motion controls at all aside from Wii Sports so the idea of saving $100 and not watching Eye get shoehorned into every game like Kinect will be is a win for this gamer.
I'm a little disappointed that PS4 doesn't include the Eye because I thought Move was the best of the motion control stuff. Sports Champions is a great game. Without the Eye included (and thus any sort of guaranteed install base) there will be little incentive for devs to make much more than shovelware for it.
I'm a little disappointed that PS4 doesn't include the Eye because I thought Move was the best of the motion control stuff. Sports Champions is a great game. Without the Eye included (and thus any sort of guaranteed install base) there will be little incentive for devs to make much more than shovelware for it.
Agreed
This is what I was trying to say and what the article was as well. I enjoyed the motion control and can still remember CAG going nuts last year when all of the accessories went on sale.
By abandoning it at launch I agree with io that it will now be faced with a future of shovelware. If you can tell a developer that you have an xx million install base that has they can guarantee has the hardware they will be more compelled to make great games and truly utilize the tech like Kinecf 2.0.
Without that guarantee it won't continue to evolve. And I was really excited to see how they were going to utilize the move with the new DS4. Now it will barely be used.
You can say you hate motion/voice/heart/face recognition gaming now. But where it goes in the future looks brighter for MS and that could turn out to be a complete benefit way above the $100 price difference at launch.
Just saying...
Agreed
This is what I was trying to say and what the article was as well. I enjoyed the motion control and can still remember CAG going nuts last year when all of the accessories went on sale.
By abandoning it at launch I agree with io that it will now be faced with a future of shovelware. If you can tell a developer that you have an xx million install base that has they can guarantee has the hardware they will be more compelled to make great games and truly utilize the tech like Kinecf 2.0.
Without that guarantee it won't continue to evolve. And I was really excited to see how they were going to utilize the move with the new DS4. Now it will barely be used.
You can say you hate motion/voice/heart/face recognition gaming now. But where it goes in the future looks brighter for MS and that could turn out to be a complete benefit way above the $100 price difference at launch.
Just saying...
KillerRamen
CAGiversary!
- Feedback
- 13 (100%)
Huh, I wonder if that means they're going to include the stand
I'm happy because it means that I can spend more money on games at launch. I'd much rather spend $60 on a game than $100 on a camera that I really don't care all that much about. I do agree that the Move was the best motion controller of the last generation and it's not really going anywhere. Developers will still have the option to integrate it into their games if it makes sense and I think they still will.
Personally, I think not having the Eye and having a lower price is better for everyone. It means that the Playstation 4 will be very competitively priced and will most likely have a faster adoption rate than the Xbox One and it also could mean that it will have a better attach rate than the Xbox One since you will be spending more money on games.
If you want the Eye, you can buy it for $60 at launch. If you decide to wait, you probably will be able to find it on sale or used. I just like that it's not being forced on anyone and I'll probably still buy it because I really liked playing FPS games with the Move on the PS3.
Gamer4life88
CAGiversary!
- Feedback
- 61 (100%)
I hardly think Sony is "abandoning" the eye by not including it in the box. They're still going to make games for it and it will be integrated into the hardcore games. It happened with the ps3 with games like The Show, KZ, Infamous ect., and if you like that sorta thing great, go out and buy the eye. That being said motion gaming is garbage for anything other then dance/workout games and is nothing more then a gimmick. And whos to say great and amazing things will come from the kinect 2.0 just because it comes in the box? Nobody knows that for sure.
Well by that logic then there isn't anything but shovelware for Kinect & Move right now, then? Granted they both had bundles available, but neither really had much of an install base and they weren't forced purchases. They both went on to sell millions of units and each had a handful of well-praised titles. Just because it's not a mandatory purchase doesn't mean it'll get supported any less than Move or Kinect are now, it just means it's not there to get shoehorned into nearly every game just because everyone has one.
And I, along with the vast majority of gamers, are more than okay with that.
I hardly think Sony is "abandoning" the eye by not including it in the box. They're still going to make games for it and it will be integrated into the hardcore games. It happened with the ps3 with games like The Show, KZ, Infamous ect., and if you like that sorta thing great, go out and buy the eye. That being said motion gaming is garbage for anything other then dance/workout games and is nothing more then a gimmick. And whos to say great and amazing things will come from the kinect 2.0 just because it comes in the box? Nobody knows that for sure.
Did you watch the kinect 2.0 demo? It's going to be way more than a gimmick for workout games.
I really don't understand the since of pride between owning an Xbox, Wii or PS. Everyone has to have the best. Just play what you like and get what you like for the value. I am going to get both. Don't really have a true dog in the fight. Just saying. One is not completely superior to the other. It's personal preference.
Did you watch the kinect 2.0 demo? It's going to be way more than a gimmick for workout games.
I really don't understand the since of pride between owning an Xbox, Wii or PS. Everyone has to have the best. Just play what you like and get what you like for the value. I am going to get both. Don't really have a true dog in the fight. Just saying. One is not completely superior to the other. It's personal preference.
Does the Eye work like Kinect does for dance games where you don't need a controller? I'm having hard time deciding what preorder to keep and my GF being able to play the new games like that without having to hold a controller is a huge factor. Definitely enjoyed some of the Kinect games myself and wish Sony kept the Eye bundled so we might actually see something more than crap games (Kinect at least, never owned the camera for PS3). Unlike everyone here I don't think motion controls are the worst thing ever, and even simple things like how the controller swap works for Kinect 2.0 is pretty damn cool.
Gamer4life88
CAGiversary!
- Feedback
- 61 (100%)
Oh I'm sure it will vastly improve the workout/dance/kid friendly games to come, but outside of that what can the kinnect 2.0 offer other game genres that arent complete gimmicks like hand gestures and voice commands?
KillerRamen
CAGiversary!
- Feedback
- 13 (100%)
The Eye for the PS3 required you to hold the move camera, but that's not the case with the PS4 eye. It can measure depth like the Kinect, so it should function very similar. The demos I've seen do show off the depth controls, but I've yet to see a demo of a dance game so I'm not 100% sure, but I am pretty sure that the PS4 won't require the move controller for dance games.
Deader2818
CAGiversary!
- Feedback
- 31 (100%)
Whats nice is you can buy the camera if you want and not have to worry about getting controls just for it to play move games since its built into the PS4.
Even though the kinect is built into the Xone, id wait and see if anyone makes a decent game for it or if we just get the same shovel ware we got for the 360 kinect.
Even though the kinect is built into the Xone, id wait and see if anyone makes a decent game for it or if we just get the same shovel ware we got for the 360 kinect.
Erad30
CAGiversary!
I still don't think that's much a feature when you have to pay $250 extra for it. If it was that big a deal, wouldn't the Wii U be selling better? That's one of it's main selling points. And I say this as someone who uses the off-tv feature a bunch.For those that own a PS Vita, lack of PS Eye Camera support, means more remote play PS4 games.
I still don't think that's much a feature when you have to pay $250 extra for it. If it was that big a deal, wouldn't the Wii U be selling better? That's one of it's main selling points. And I say this as someone who uses the off-tv feature a bunch.
Exactly! People giving me shit about the eye and kinect...
The Kinect has sold millions more than the Vita
Exactly! People giving me shit about the eye and kinect...
The Kinect has sold millions more than the Vita
Hopefully they put out something showcasing that style of game. That's pretty much the only thing keeping me on the fence as in my house it's a huge deal (and anything to get her gaming more and more is an added bonus).
Deader2818
CAGiversary!
- Feedback
- 31 (100%)
Also the Vita isn't going to be $250 forever. The price is going to drop as time goes by, and it will be a nice feature to have when people do get one.For those that own a PS Vita, lack of PS Eye Camera support, means more remote play PS4 games.
Last edited by a moderator:
KillerRamen
CAGiversary!
- Feedback
- 13 (100%)
http://youtu.be/12odQj-Kboo
I think the announcement trailer for Just Dance 2014 almost confirms that the dance moves will be detected by the camera. They don't show the Move controllers in the game at all, but they do show the Wii-motes. They also have the Move Logo for the PS3, but the logo is absent on the PS4.
http://youtu.be/Q4TcJdy-BGs
I think the tech demo shows that the Playstation Camera is definitely capable, so we'll see.
Well that helps lol. Thanks man. Guess it'll be pretty easy to get her to switch as long as it works as well as Kinect did.
TimboSliceGB
CAGiversary!
- Feedback
- 1 (100%)
why would anyone be against kinect stuff being put into triple A titles if it adds to gameplay but don't make you play with it no one should have a problem.
kinect is best thing ever made for things like netflix and other apps it's awsome to pause a thing on netflix with out having to reach for or get controller and turn it on .
KillerRamen
CAGiversary!
- Feedback
- 13 (100%)
I absolutely hate the Kinect when watching Netflix. The stupid thing always seem to screw with my stream by pausing, rewinding, forwarding or stopping whatever I am watching. Needless to say, I no longer watch Netflix on my Xbox 360.
TimboSliceGB
CAGiversary!
- Feedback
- 1 (100%)
where do you live a shoping center lol the kinect just don't random does that stuff unless it hears those words
Deader2818
CAGiversary!
- Feedback
- 31 (100%)
when did watching TV become so hard that Microsoft felt they need to make it easier?
http://9to5mac.com/2013/05/28/tim-cook-says-apple-has-a-grand-vision-for-the-apple-tv/
Probably trying to beat Apple to the punch before they come eat MS's lunch again.
Last edited by a moderator:
TimboSliceGB
CAGiversary!
- Feedback
- 1 (100%)
to be honest im not really up on that tv stuff everything that it does can already be done. i can switch between my game and tv in two secs by clicking inputs on my tv remote
Stop right there and look at the Wii. If an entire console devoted to motion control couldn't convince gamers that the gimmick was the future, then it's safe to say Sony made the right call. All you saw on Wii was shovelware aside from 1st party games. I'm not convinced that a developer out there was holding back, just waiting for larger install bases of Kinect or the PS Eye to make some amazing motion game.
The truth of the matter is that it's a niche market and should be treated as such.
Last edited by a moderator:
StryderOmega
CAGiversary!
- Feedback
- 5 (100%)
Well I get where your coming from, but the Wii also had drawbacks for publishers.
They knew the hardcore wouldn't buy their titles on a, at the time, non next gen system when both the PS3 and 360 were boasting HD graphics and such. Same thing is happening to the Wii U right now. Why buy decade old technology for a gimmick? Oh wait, people bought Macs for years...
Dark Lord Greg
CAGiversary!
- Feedback
- 4 (100%)
or maybe it will properly implemented since developers know every Xbox One owner has Kinect and not have to just tack it on at the end to get that little "better with kinect" banner on the box. While you may like to just sit on the couch while playing video games sales of Kinect and Wii and Wii Fit show that people do like motion games and exercise games
I'm glad Sony elected to make the camera optional. It makes the price of the console attractive, it satisfies privacy advocate concerns since it doesn't have a built in camera like both the Wii U and Bone, and like others have mentioned, no shoehorned in motion controls. Also other than dance and fitness games, motion gaming is pretty much last gen and dead in the water, the fad is over and gone. And because multiplats will be targeting 2 platforms that don't have motion controls (PC and PS4) we likely won't see too much of it even on the Bone. Kudos to Sony, one of many things they've done right with the PS4.
Last edited by a moderator:
I like how so many people really believe since everyone will have a Kinect now that means devs are going to magically come up with new and ingenious ways to use motion controls... I'm sure there will be some games that use it interestingly(just like this gen), but it's going to wind up being the opposite. It's just going to be tacked on to even more games in useless ways just so they can put that check mark on the box.
There will be no incredible revolution in motion controls just because there are more out in the wild.
There will be no incredible revolution in motion controls just because there are more out in the wild.
I like how so many people really believe since everyone will have a Kinect now that means devs are going to magically come up with new and ingenious ways to use motion controls... I'm sure there will be some games that use it interestingly(just like this gen), but it's going to wind up being the opposite. It's just going to be tacked on to even more games in useless ways just so they can put that check mark on the box.
There will be no incredible revolution in motion controls just because there are more out in the wild.
Exactly because the tech in 2.0 isn't that different right? :lol:
There will be no incredible revolution in motion controls just because there are more out in the wild.
Exactly because the tech in 2.0 isn't that different right? :lol:
Deader2818
CAGiversary!
- Feedback
- 31 (100%)
Can you really give me an idea of what the kinect can do that would be so amazing for gaming?
Sure, it will be better than Kinect 1.0. But that still doesn't matter for those of us who have no interest in motion controls or voice commands regardless of how well they work. If/when they're the norm across the board, I'd stop gaming or just replay old games.
Games are my veg on the couch and relax time. I get plenty of activity from running, lifting, walking the dogs, walking around the city etc. I have no interest in any type of motion controls in game as I just want to slouch on the couch and relax. Voice commands to me just add nothing to the game, and can be problematic since I tend to play late at night and have to worry about bothering the neighbors or my fiancee etc. as you tend to have to talk fairly loud for a mic across the room to register.
Just not my cup of tea, regardless of how well they work. So I'm happy as hell Sony isn't packing the camera in the PS4 and leaving it as an option for people who enjoy that stuff as it means it won't get shoe horned into every game.
Does the vita have to be on the same network--i.e. is it just off TV in the same house? If so, that it useless to me as I'm not going to game on a small screen at home instead of the TV (no kids, roommates etc. hogging the TV).
If it could be used anywhere with a good enough internet connection, I could see the appeal. I could play games when killing time between meetings or classes at work etc. Or at my girlfriends place (if we get her spotchy internet connection fixed). But agreed on price, not sure I'd pay $250 for that. And I'll be moving in with my girlfriend a couple months after the PS4 is out so that would kill a lot of the usefulness of the feature for me anyway--I do a lot of 3DS gaming over there now as its too much hassle to lug the PS3 or 360 back and forth and change settings from 1080p to 720p etc.
To be fair, a home theater system can be complicated for a lot of people with needing to switch inputs on the TV and receiver, turn whatever other box on (DVR, Bluray player etc.).
But there are fairly cheap Harmony remotes that once set up already make this very easy.
The only part I liked about it was just being able to say a channel name. With the hundreds of channels we get these days, it can be tough to find one you seldom watch. But a quick google like "What channel is SpikeTV on DirecTV" makes that pretty painless--had to do that for the X1 reveal coincidentally as I had no idea where Spike was in the guide.
bread's done