This Generation's Console War is Officially Stupid

Methoes

Methoes

CAGiversary!
Feedback
1 (100%)
Everyone’s excited about the PS4 now that they know the price and now that they know the Xbox One has features that are designed to help Microsoft and the Publisher make more money rather than to help the customer enjoy games how they want.  I do get that and also get why it makes a lot of people mad, but it’s really too bad because from what I can tell Microsoft actually tried to do something different with the console market and technology and Sony decided safe and same was good enough.

Xbox One:

  • They are trying new ways to integrate your gaming system into your media center seamlessly by adding and HDMI in and are basically bringing voice controlled ALT-TAB plus a few other features to the TV.
  • Continuing down the path of advancing voice recognition and motion control.  They want it to be a standard living room feature now for all your media needs.
  • Attempting to take a step away from physical media where the reliance on brick and mortar retail and discs is less relevant (something basically every other media has already done including the PC game market). DRM Free!!!
  • Giving publishers native ability to do what they were trying to do already anyways (thus strengthening their relationship with them).  Has everyone forgotten online pass DLC already?  Publishers find a way to get more money from used games whether the console supports that effort or not.  Great this might be coming back...
PS4:

  • So it’s a PlayStation and it plays games.  Remember the PS3?  That’s this, except the hardware is better.
  • It has touch sensor on the controller.  No details on how that could be used to improve gaming though so I can’t really say anything pro or con about it.
  • It’s cheaper.
So in the end everyone praised Sony for the PS4.  Why?  Because it’s the same and it’s cheaper.  That’s really all it took this time around.  They actually produced a promotional video and put slides into their E3 presentation telling us that we could trade games with our friends or sell them to used game shops… as if that’s something to get excited about.  Something we can already do now and have been able to do for decades.  If they told me I could at least do that digitally (think Steam gifts, but after I’ve already played the game though) then I might actually care.

So I say again, this generation’s console war is officially stupid.  The rally cry for sameness and status quo.  Microsoft is still trying to change the living room, but they shot themselves in the foot by trying to nickel and dime everyone on used/traded games and by forcing technology that some people simply don’t want (and at a price too) instead of allowing for customization.  Sony won by default and console gaming as a whole suffers.

What do you all think?

 
Last edited by a moderator:
You do realize there's a huge difference between a couple developers doing online passes and having forced DRM in EVERY SINGLE GAME, right? And I agree that eventually we will step away from physical media but the way to do it is gradually and show it as a positive thing. Microsoft failed at both of those big time. Also you want the future? IT'S NOT LIVE TV. Live TV is barely a thing these days and more people are cutting themselves off from cable/satellite completely, relying on much cheaper streaming services for their movie and TV entertainment. It'll take awhile sure, but TV as MS is using it is a dinosaur that will be extinct in due time.

 
Last edited by a moderator:
Don't really have a dog in the race... I've been buying all the consoles since back when I lined up a TG-16, SNES and Genesis and that will continue (though maybe not all at once at these prices).  I do find it hilarious that Sony is suddenly the hero of gaming when seemingly just yesterday they were launching at $600 and gamers were screaming they were trying to shove Blu-Ray down our throats.  

I actually LIKE that the consoles are going in different directions.  I hate having to have two nearly identical boxes just so I can play slightly different games (aka exclusives).  Only thing I can say about Microsoft is that it seems interesting to me that they could have avoided all of this by simply going all digital, but they didn't have the nerve to try (or the data screams strongly that it would be a mistake).  The discs are worthless, and the thought of Microsoft setting up a system to trade in worthless discs for credit/cash is amusing to me.

 
The Xbox One is everything that I don't want in a video game console. It's always on, it requires a creepy ass camera that's also always on, it treats consumers like criminals and has to check to see if they want to give you permission to play. It will also be a useless brick when they decide to shut down the servers.

I have never wanted a console to fail, but I hope the Xbox One fails miserably. I do not want this kind of shit to infect gaming as a whole.

 
Methoes said:
They actually produced a promotional video and put slides into their E3 presentation telling us that we could trade games with our friends or sell them to used game shops… as if that’s something to get excited about. Something we can already do now and have been able to do for decades.
Click to expand...
You can't fault Sony for illustrating how stupid it sounds on paper after M$ introduced the concept. The only sad thing here is that it needed to be brought up as 'features' thanks to M$' draconian scheme.

 
Methoes said:
  • Attempting to take a step away from physical media where the reliance on brick and mortar retail and discs is less relevant (something basically every other media has already done including the PC game market).
Click to expand...
Why should people be forced away from physical media? Both the music and movie industries give people the option to buy it digitally or physically, so saying every other media has already moved away from physical media is false. Plus music is primarily DRM-free so that is a completely different situation.

Methoes said:
They actually produced a promotional video and put slides into their E3 presentation telling us that we could trade games with our friends or sell them to used game shops… as if that’s something to get excited about. Something we can already do now and have been able to do for decades.
Click to expand...
So we should instead get excited that Microsoft doesn't let us do that?

Methoes said:
Sony won by default and console gaming as a whole suffers.
Click to expand...
Gaming evolves because games change not because the distribution method changes. There will be new games on all 3 systems that are unique and new. Buying games digitally or connecting your cable box to your console will not change the games in the slightest.

 
Last edited by a moderator:
People keep comparing this to steam but the difference is Steam built trust by offering itself as a service (and bottom line they have competition in the form of other services and box retail) and letting people come to them and pointing out the positives like huge sales. Microsoft is pretty much would be the only option here and is just telling you that's how it is from now on.

 
I cut the cord so I don't need any TV box functionality. I don't want Kinect. I'm not going to pay for something I'm not going to use.

As for games, according to Digital Foundry the PS4 is theoretically 50% more powerful than the Xbox One. It's going to get very interesting going forward.
 
The problems I have with MS's approach, and the OPs logic is basically 2 fold.

The DRM is unacceptable for multiple reasons.  Mainly that it's this half assed approach to going digital without going fully digital.  Games are going to cost the same as current, non DRM game discs that I can sell where ever I like.  That's unacceptable as DRM games I can only trade in to "participating retailers" have less value as trade in values always suck compared to selling a game yourself, much less for the downloaded copies that you can't sell at all.  They should have left game discs as are, and gradually gave gamers incentives to get the download version instead--cheaper prices, put games out digitally a week or month before the disc version, give extra content in the download version etc.  That's how you get people into digital games and away from disc games, not by forcing it down their throat and selling people discs they don't truly own and have limited rights on how they can use them (must connect to internet once a day) and how they sell/trade them.  I'd happily go digital if prices followed something like the Steam model as I'd rather not have to hassle with selling game discs (I don't collect or replay games so everything gets sold).  But not when the games are $60 a pop.  Maybe if digital games end up dropping in price more like disc games currently I could pick up an Xbox One 2-3+ years into the gen when a bunch of cheap games are available.  But they've lost me at launch and I doubt I'll want two consoles this generation.

Second, the media stuff is half baked.  It doesn't unclutter my tv stand at all since you just plug your cable/satellite box into it.  It won't work as fast/seamlessly as shown since changing channels etc. will be limited by the speed of your set top box (and mine is pretty slow and clunky).  The voice commands are neat, but we'll start seeing cable/sat boxes/DVRs having that built in probably.  I saw that DirecTV added voice control options to their iPhone app that you can use to change channels, search on demand etc.  

Unlike many I do watch live TV (sports primarily) so I'd be interested in an all in one, set top box that could be my cable/sat DVR, game machine, Bluray player and video streamer and thus declutter my tv stand and simplify usage of the home theater.  But MS hasn't achieved that since you still need a cable/satellite box,and it remains to be seen how the quality of Bluray playback compares to a good standalone player or PS3/4.

 
"The Xbox One will feature, by default, an always-on, works-in-the-dark, microphone and camera that’s constantly connected to the internet and 300,000 servers. What could possibly go wrong?"

in light of the recent NSA news and the fact that Microsoft is one of the key partners who DESIGNED NSA's systems... who's interested in getting an always-on Kinect Xbox? They WILL NOT let you disable Kinect.... hmmm ...

 
supradealz said:
in light of the recent NSA news and the fact that Microsoft is one of the key partners who DESIGNED NSA's systems... who's interested in getting an always-on Kinect Xbox? They WILL NOT let you disable Kinect.... hmmm ...
Click to expand...
Well to be fair I think they did say you could turn it off, set it so it's not on and listening for "Xbox On" when the system is off etc. It just has to be plugged into the system. So there are options for the paranoid to turn it off I guess, beyond just unplugging it when the console is off.

 
Last edited by a moderator:
Methoes said:
Xbox One:

  • They are trying new ways to integrate your gaming system into your media center seamlessly by adding and HDMI in and are basically bringing voice controlled ALT-TAB plus a few other features to the TV.
  • Continuing down the path of advancing voice recognition and motion control. They want it to be a standard living room feature now for all your media needs.
  • Attempting to take a step away from physical media where the reliance on brick and mortar retail and discs is less relevant (something basically every other media has already done including the PC game market).
  • Giving publishers native ability to do what they were trying to do already anyways (thus strengthening their relationship with them). Has everyone forgotten online pass DLC already? Publishers find a way to get more money from used games whether the console supports that effort or not.
Click to expand...
Everyone dreams of an all in one media center and although I give them credit for the voice Alt-Tab I don't seeing it being any more than a distraction. On the Vita I can already pause my game look at a faq and go back to my game, which is probably the most I'd use something like that for. Assuming this will work fine on the PS4 too. I also already have an HTPC.

Voice Recogition and Motion Control are cool and all but until they show a non-Kinect branded game that actually takes advantage of these unique features I don't see it as an advancement.

I realize everything will go digital at some point and I'm largely ok with that but the half and half approach is just dumb. It's going to frustrate the average consumer. I'd almost prefer it if they went all digital. With the current ecosystem they may as well have.

The online pass wasn't great but at least offered the consumer some choice because if they bought a game and didn't want to play the online they didn't have to pay another fee. I think were at a crossroads. All people really want at the end of the day is cheaper games. I'd almost prefer a game like Uncharted would launch at $50 without the multiplayer component. It's telling with how fast retail games are dropping that it's getting harder to stay a $60 blockbuster for a long time. Right now it seems as if you are either an indie game around $10 or a top tier blockbuster at $60. I think there needs to be some more thoughtful pricing. A game like Fuse or Remember Me might sell a whole lot more at $30 or $40 if they priced them competively from the get go. I think the industry and the consumer is at fault for this. If a game is cheap we think it's subpar and most publishers want $60 when $40 may be more realistic for the product.

As for the XBOX One vs. PS4 debate. I'll admit I like Sony's stance on used games but I'm going PS4 first (for now) mainly because I've liked the direction they have been taking lately. PS+ offers a great value between the PS3 and Vita and now I'll be getting even more content for my $50 a year. I like that the PS3 is still getting some great exclusives like The Last of Us and Beyond Two Souls. I like the approach they are taking with indie developers by allowing them to easily transition into the console space without having to jump through all the hoops that MS is imposing. Lastly I like they are looking at the console as a gaming device first because at the end of the day that is all I really want.

 
dmaul1114 said:
supradealz said:
in light of the recent NSA news and the fact that Microsoft is one of the key partners who DESIGNED NSA's systems... who's interested in getting an always-on Kinect Xbox? They WILL NOT let you disable Kinect.... hmmm ...
Click to expand...
Well to be fair I think they did say you could turn it off, set it so it's not on and listening for "Xbox On" when the system is off etc. It just has to be plugged into the system. So there are options for the paranoid to turn it off I guess, beyond just unplugging it when the console is off.
Click to expand...
The problem with always-on systems like the Xbox One is that they could always just turn the camera back on remotely.

 
Methoes said:
They are trying new ways to integrate your gaming system into your media center seamlessly by adding and HDMI in and are basically bringing voice controlled ALT-TAB plus a few other features to the TV.
Click to expand...
The TV integration is a significant point. And I think its what a lot of non-gamers and/or lapsed gamers are going to be most interested in. I have a brother who is seriously considering an XBox One, largely because of this feature. He rarely ever plays games anymore, but he does still watch cable TV, and he wishes he had a better interface for controlling his media experience. The Blu-Ray playback and potential for games if he felt like it are icing on the cake to him. He is interested in the XBox One because he wants to use it as a $500 TV remote. There will be a certain number of consumers who will want an XBox One for the same reason.

The problem is that the number of those users isn't going to be very large. My brother has a good job and can afford this sort of thing. The vast majority of consumers are not going to want to drop that much money on a video game console just to use it to change channels. And then there are the more committed gaming enthusiasts like me. I haven't had cable TV at my house for nearly seven years. (since I moved in) I get my entertainment over the internet or from retail discs. The XBox One's media switching features would be entirely wasted on me.

And the most significant drawback is that the competition in the TV interface space is already heating up. Smart TVs are starting to reach affordable prices, and more of them will begin to have cameras and motion controls built in by default. The XBox One will not be the only device to incorporate such controls for long.

You are right in pointing out that the PS4 is just "more of the same." But that is not necessarily a drawback. By focusing on a single primary function, the PS4 will be able to excel at that function. Attempting to be an all-in-one media box turned out to be a serious mistake for the PS3. The XBox One probably won't suffer as much for its fragmented focus as the PS3 did, but I still think it might be spreading itself too thin.

 
Last edited by a moderator:
The biggest advance PS4 made was by foregoing the alien hardware of the PS3 era, ensuring that worldwide game companies (and Xbox developers) have an easy time porting/making games. The PS3 seemed like it was a nightmare for developers to accomodate.

 
Last edited by a moderator:
This generations console war is stupid because it's obvious the Xbone is trash.

It's almost as stupid as people constantly posting things like Wii60!

 
Last edited by a moderator:
  • They are trying new ways to integrate your gaming system into your media center seamlessly by adding and HDMI in and are basically bringing voice controlled ALT-TAB plus a few other features to the TV.
[SIZE=11.818181991577148px]Look, I have a laptop, I have a tablet, I have a smart phone, my TV has multiple HDMI inputs. Theyre not adding anything new whatsoever, nothing that I need nor impresses me. Nothing that eliminates the needs for my other devices. NONE of this crap does anything for me[/SIZE]

  • Continuing down the path of advancing voice recognition and motion control.  They want it to be a standard living room feature now for all your media needs.
I still dont think of motion control as gaming, I think of it as a gimic. Although I will give them credit that if they are able to incorporate this into REAL games (instead of the kinect gimic crap) then they deserve some credit. Like voice commands for a shooter or something, that would be cool. But FORCING all gamers to buy it, not really a fan of (since its bundled youre paying for it by default)

  • Attempting to take a step away from physical media where the reliance on brick and mortar retail and discs is less relevant (something basically every other media has already done including the PC game market).
This is flat out a bad thing. Theyre basically resulting in a forced [SIZE=11.818181991577148px]monopoly[/SIZE]  forcing gamers to buy games from them. I havent paid MSRP for a game in 5 + years, and if I did it was because it came with a 20$ gift card or something to that effect. If Microsoft wanted to eliminate the middle man and lower the default price of games to 39.99 instead of 59.99 I could get behind this. But as far as im concerned this is TERRIBLE since it eliminates competition and forces us to pay MORE for games. Of all the things you listed this is by far the most terrible

  • Giving publishers native ability to do what they were trying to do already anyways (thus strengthening their relationship with them).  Has everyone forgotten online pass DLC already?  Publishers find a way to get more money from used games whether the console supports that effort or not.
I dont completely buy this, not yet at least. Microsoft was incredibly restrictive with the 360 that it made it very difficult for me to buy games on the 360 over the pc. For instance Dungeon Defenders a game i loved on the xbox, I eventually quit because they were so restrictive with DLC. 

PS4:

  • So it’s a PlayStation and it plays games.  Remember the PS3?  That’s this, except the hardware is better.
  • It has touch sensor on the controller.  No details on how that could be used to improve gaming though so I can’t really say anything pro or con about it.
  • It’s cheaper.
Im not gonna argue any of this because its all true. But 100$ cheaper is pretty huge, especially considering that the ps4 "probably" has better hardware than the 360. I mean dd5 ram and 100$ cheaper vs ddr3 cmon now

Im not trying to bury microsoft, because I play my xbox 360 more than any other console. I own a wii u, and preorded both an xbox one and ps4. But its unquestionable that Microsoft got greedy with this generation, and sony is going to make them hurt

Hopefully this results in microsoft rethinking some of its shitty policies, and forces them to think outside the box to make more than shooters. Hopefully a  competition where the [SIZE=11.818181991577148px]juggernaut[/SIZE] (Microsoft) is actually losing forces them to be innovative creative and ultimately benefits the gamer.

Because I think its safe to say that no matter how badly [SIZE=11.818181991577148px]Microsoft[/SIZE] gets its ass kicked by sony (which hopefully is a ton) that theyre not going away. But the more Microsoft gets it ass kicked the greater the changes theyll be forced to make in an attempt to appeal to gamers.

[SIZE=11.818181991577148px]Maybe im being an optimist  but I think this console wars is the best thing that could of happened to gaming. If were lucky this generation of games will [/SIZE]
look nothing like the last, which was probably the worst generation of gaming ever

 
jkam said:
On the Vita I can already pause my game look at a faq and go back to my game, which is probably the most I'd use something like that for. Assuming this will work fine on the PS4 too.
Click to expand...
Even that seems like something I'd never use as I always have my iPad nearby (and usually my laptop too) and it's just easier to have a faq on those so I don't even have to switch screens or split screens etc.

 
Methoes said:
  • Giving publishers native ability to do what they were trying to do already anyways (thus strengthening their relationship with them). Has everyone forgotten online pass DLC already? Publishers find a way to get more money from used games whether the console supports that effort or not.
Click to expand...
Does this mean Valve can release free DLC? Because MS' restriction on paid vs. free DLC on the 360 was one of the dumbest things ever.

 
dcm1602 said:
Im not trying to bury microsoft, because I play my xbox 360 more than any other console. I own a wii u, and preorded both an xbox one and ps4. But its unquestionable that Microsoft got greedy with this generation, and sony is going to make them hurt
Click to expand...
I agree with most of what you said, but the fact that you pre-ordered an Xbox One just means you're still willing to support Microsoft's horrible policies and that makes you part of the problem.

 

Scarmiglione said:
The problems I have with MS's approach, and the OPs logic is basically 2 fold.

The DRM is unacceptable for multiple reasons. Mainly that it's this half assed approach to going digital without going fully digital. Games are going to cost the same as current, non DRM game discs that I can sell where ever I like. That's unacceptable as DRM games I can only trade in to "participating retailers" have less value as trade in values always suck compared to selling a game yourself, much less for the downloaded copies that you can't sell at all. They should have left game discs as are, and gradually gave gamers incentives to get the download version instead--cheaper prices, put games out digitally a week or month before the disc version, give extra content in the download version etc. That's how you get people into digital games and away from disc games, not by forcing it down their throat and selling people discs they don't truly own and have limited rights on how they can use them (must connect to internet once a day) and how they sell/trade them. I'd happily go digital if prices followed something like the Steam model as I'd rather not have to hassle with selling game discs (I don't collect or replay games so everything gets sold). But not when the games are $60 a pop. Maybe if digital games end up dropping in price more like disc games currently I could pick up an Xbox One 2-3+ years into the gen when a bunch of cheap games are available. But they've lost me at launch and I doubt I'll want two consoles this generation.

Second, the media stuff is half baked. It doesn't unclutter my tv stand at all since you just plug your cable/satellite box into it. It won't work as fast/seamlessly as shown since changing channels etc. will be limited by the speed of your set top box (and mine is pretty slow and clunky). The voice commands are neat, but we'll start seeing cable/sat boxes/DVRs having that built in probably. I saw that DirecTV added voice control options to their iPhone app that you can use to change channels, search on demand etc.

Unlike many I do watch live TV (sports primarily) so I'd be interested in an all in one, set top box that could be my cable/sat DVR, game machine, Bluray player and video streamer and thus declutter my tv stand and simplify usage of the home theater. But MS hasn't achieved that since you still need a cable/satellite box,and it remains to be seen how the quality of Bluray playback compares to a good standalone player or PS3/4.

^
This guy. I agree with almost everything said (with a few minor disagreements that are irrelevant). My main issue is with the DRM, but he brings up so many good points, I need not say anything really. A lot of people have their heads on straight around here it seems.

Also, as the saying goes...

"If it ain't broken, don't fix it!"

No need to change the way it functions so long as it functions well. Glad Sony realized this. I do believe the 360s had a lot of issues around first release and that caused a lot of fuss. Made me wonder why people still got the things. Even I ended up getting one in '08. Now...I think I'm gonna pass on this junkheap Xbox One. Too much DRM, always online (what if a storm kicks my net offline? It would be useless to play a single player game, since it wouldn't allow it), and not to mention the thing is atrocious to look at...
Click to expand...
 
Last edited by a moderator:
whoknows said:
Kazuya said:
KillerRamen said:
The problem with always-on systems like the Xbox One is that they could always just turn the camera back on remotely.
Click to expand...
I believe they also said it would come with a tinfoil hat to help assuage those fears.
Click to expand...
You say that, but when we find out we actually are being watched you're going to look really stupid.
Click to expand...
Even if I were to allow for such an asinine concept as hatching a plot to watch the group of Americans who choose to buy a video game console, do you have any idea how long it would take for consumers/gaming sites/tech sites to expose that it would be doing it? Try day one. Only one group looks stupid here.
 
I'm definitely an advocate for moving into the future of digital rights restrictions, but a better decision would have been to focus more on the product's technical capabilities rather than slamming the world with these convoluted rules restricting game sharing and offline gaming. Guess – Microsoft just lifted the whole 24 hour “check-in” period and now “free DRM” on media.  What about my family plan?  Take that away too…

Also, I think demonstrating IllumiRoom months before the reveal of the Xbox One and then not even mentioning it as a potential feature for the Xbox ONE was a big mistake. That was the main reason I was looking forward to the next-gen Xbox.

 
Last edited by a moderator:
Already have a next gen console, it's called Nexus 7 and it plays all my favorite old games :D

In regards to OP, console wars have been stupid since Sega/Nintendo days.  The only difference is that you got beat up if you talked shit about someone else console.  Playground video game talk, pure shit talking gold.

 
Last edited by a moderator:
j-cart said:
In regards to OP, console wars have been stupid since Sega/Nintendo days. The only difference is that you got beat up if you talked shit about someone else console. Playground video game talk, pure shit talking gold.
Click to expand...
If anything, the recent reversal by Microsoft proves that "console wars" are actually great, and not stupid in the slightest. The controversy over the differences between the upcoming XBox One and PS4 helped to force Microsoft into abandoning its anti-consumer DRM scheme. I'd say that's a net positive to come out of this conflict.

Competition is always good for the end consumers. It keeps prices down and drives companies to improve their products and services. (in order to gain a competitive advantage) I say lets keep these console wars going. I'll tell you who the real winner is. It's ME!

 
I think the OP is right. At the very least, MS tried to do something different, though it failed to demonstrate how their approach is better.. PS4 is just PS3 all over again, including the fact that none of your games and controllers work.

 
moothemagiccow said:
I think the OP is right. At the very least, MS tried to do something different, though it failed to demonstrate how their approach is better.. PS4 is just PS3 all over again, including the fact that none of your games and controllers work.
Click to expand...
I don't think the X1 was offering anything new gaming wise though. Other than improved Kinect for those that like it I guess--assuming it is improved.

TV stuff isn't gaming. DRM isn't gaming etc. So it was just a more powerful 360/Kinect combo just like the PS4 is just a more powerful PS3--i.e. pretty much the same as every generation leap we've had basically--just initially with DRM that was very restrictive in how we could sell/trade games we buy.

Granted the leap this gen isn't like going from 2D to 3D or standard def to HD etc.--but there just hasn't been those kind of technological innovations in recent years so there's not much they can do but put out more powerful systems with better graphics.

Personally, I'm fine with that. I've been very happy with gaming this generation, and would have been fine continuing on for another few years. But I'm fine to pick up consoles to just play more of the same types of games with even better graphics. I've got a PS4 pre-ordered, and will likely just stick with it as I don't really game enough to justify multiple consoles. 360 was my most played console this gen, but I hate Kinect stuff and won't pay the extra $100 because of it. And their DRM policies rubbed me the wrong way, I'm happy they got rid of them but that they still tried makes me not want to support them.

 
I'll probably get a PS4 at or near launch, and an xbox 180 somewhere down the line, after a price drop or a redesign.

I was the opposite last gen, had a 360 from near launch and only picked up a PS3 when the slim came out to catch up on some PS3 exclusives.  I'm not a fanboy and own nearly every console and handheald of the last 20+ years.

I agree with all the anti-MS sentiment regarding their anti-consumer DRM policies and I'm glad they listened and reversed course, but I don't delude myself into thinking they did it willingly. 

The media stuff on the 180 I don't care about.  I can stream Netflix on 20 different devices I already own, and the 180 wont replace my cablebox so whats the point.  I dont watch enough TV shows or movies to care if my experience is more streamlined.

And I don't give a crap about Kinect.  They have had Kinect on the 360 for years now and all the games (of which there are not many) are shit.  I don't want to talk to my consoles, or wave my hands at them to get things done.  And I certainly won't pay extra to have this included in my console purchase.  Oh i can swipe my arms through the air and scroll through my Netflix queue?  TAKE MY MONEY!  lol  If I want to get exercise I will go outside and ride my bike.

They very fact that Kinect is standard and required (I cant plug it in and then wrap in up in duct tape) scares me because I can see MS begging developers to shoehorn half baked Kinect elements into their games. Just like early PS3 games had shitty sixaxis controls tacked on, until consumers shit on it enough that developers stopped doing it.  There's a reason dual stick controllers have been around for 15+ years, and keyboard and mouse has been around for 30+ years, it's because those are the best, and most efficient ways to control consoles and PC's respectively.  Kinect seems like a solution in search of a problem.  And I didn't even touch on the creepy always on camera and mic privacy issues, which do concern me.

Then again, I'm an old fart (I actually value my privacy! imagine that), and no longer the target demo for this stuff, even though I easily spend $10k plus a year me and my Wife's gaming habits.

 
Both MS and Sony have cameras for motion games, but motion gaming is pretty much dead. Thw Wii had great success with its motion games, but that was just a phase....and that phase is over.
 
I've owned all 3 major consoles since last generation (Xbox, Playstation, Nintendo) and I agree that the console "war" can be silly with the amount of time people spend arguing. I love all my consoles! The Xbox tends to be better for shooters but has other great games, the Playstation is GREAT for RPG's, and Nintendo is great for platforming Mario and of course Zelda. The Wii / Wii U is also my personal choice for couch co-op.

I have both the PS4 and Xbox One pre-ordered. Although I have to admit, I didn't pre-order the Xbox One until they reversed their stance on the Online DRM stuff.

 
Last edited by a moderator:
You must log in or register to reply here.
bread's done
Back
Top