[QUOTE=Alex_DeLarge;41815338]Thing is though, the benefits of PS+ outweighs the $4.99 a month, easily. [b]Free games, discounts on games/DLC, exclusive content,[/b] additional benefits such as cloud saving and cross-game chat.[/QUOTE]
The problem I have with the PS4 is everything I bolded I don't even want and cross-game chat should be a normal feature of the console.
The reason why I had a PS3 and enjoyed it was because I didn't have to pay to use the internet that's already being paid for, and I could spend time with my cousin who's constantly in other parts of the country. Seeing as the PS4 requires me to pay for a subscription to play certain games online has permanently ruined consoles for me.
The X-Box One is making the right moves for the most part. I wasn't opposed to the DRM/non-sharing of games but everything else was pretty stupid, and the fact that they're being less stupid is nice. Unfortunately, I'm not interested in paying to be online nor any of the titles that are announced, and I'm generally opposed to exclusives.
[QUOTE=1STrandomman;41820081]If that's what they were actually trying to do they fucked up horribly. The right way to do it would be to just not even have optical media at all, but they can't do that due to the influence of brick and mortars. Add to that the fact that console and PC gaming are different markets with different needs and expectations to begin with and you have all the reasons why the xbone isn't the steam box that microsoft people want you to think it is.[/QUOTE]
Yeah, and internet connections aren't developed in a lot of places too. I do understand why they would still want optical, but in 2-3 years when people start having bluray drive issues it will seem stupid.
Then again, xbox and the like are budget consoles, so optical media is probably the easiest and cheapest option. It'll never compare to Steam (i.e. a marketplace with much fewer regional restrictions) because of how big Microsoft and Sony are.
I got excited when I saw the title. I thought it meant they would sell a bundle without Kinect,which would be like 100$ cheaper. If that was true i'd buy an One,but seeing as it's still mandatory to buy...nah. I have no room for such things,and i'm not going to spend 100 dollars on something I won't use.
The small Hardware difference doesn't bother me, so the only thing left i don't like about the Xbone one is the price.
I find it stupid how everyone says things like "It's too late" or "They considered them in the first place so i won't be buying it". The consoles haven't released yet, so it's not too late. There were some alright reasons for what they proposed at first, although i didn't think they were good enough really. Everyone complained and used what the original Xbone one suggestions were to justify hating Microsoft, and now they've changed most things, they are using that they've changed things to justify hating them.
The people who say this doesn't matter now are just looking for any excuse to hate Microsoft. The fact that they changed these policies means they realized what the suggested was wrong and the Xbone one wasn't going to do well with them. They are doing things to make it better, but the way some people respond to it make it seem like that's a bad thing.
The fact that they were saying the xbox one was made to run that way and couldn't be turned off by 'the flip of a switch' is what gets me the most. Almost makes me think they'll just slowly start flipping those switches back on after the launch.
[QUOTE=killa101;41821085]The fact that they were saying the xbox one was made to run that way and couldn't be turned off by 'the flip of a switch' is what gets me the most. Almost makes me think they'll just slowly start flipping those switches back on after the launch.[/QUOTE]
It was the previous version of the Xbox one that was meant to run that way, obviously they could change it but not without changing other things, which is what they've now done. They won't turn it back on, that would just make people angry and would ruin it again.
[QUOTE=nightlord;41821220]It was the previous version of the Xbox one that was meant to run that way, obviously they could change it but not without changing other things, which is what they've now done. They won't turn it back on, that would just make people angry and would ruin it again.[/QUOTE]
as experience has told us, they don't care about the consumers until they actively start yelling.
[QUOTE=EcksDee;41821262]as experience has told us, they don't care about the consumers until they actively start yelling.[/QUOTE]
never forgive never forget micro$oft a shit
If they sell it for cheaper without the Kinect I will probably buy one.
[editline]13th August 2013[/editline]
The media features without the invasion of privacy are pretty cool.
[IMG]http://i.imgur.com/jlvUTBe.png[/IMG]
Kinect a shit.
[QUOTE=Alex_DeLarge;41815338]
Thing is though, the benefits of PS+ outweighs the $4.99 a month, easily. Free games, discounts on games/DLC, exclusive content, additional benefits such as cloud saving and cross-game chat.
[img]http://www.technobuffalo.com/wp-content/uploads/2013/06/PlayStation-Plus-Year-One-Free-Games.png[/img]
I mean this month, we just got Hitman Absolution and BitTripRunner 2.[/QUOTE]
Is there a larger version of this? I find it hard to read most of those.
[QUOTE=Sir Whoopsalot;41821941]Is there a larger version of this? I find it hard to read most of those.[/QUOTE]
[url]http://uk.playstation.com/playstationplus/[/url]
Well... here goes 399$ version without kinect.
[QUOTE=Scot;41821924][IMG]http://i.imgur.com/jlvUTBe.png[/IMG]
Kinect a shit.[/QUOTE]
Can you link to that?
[QUOTE=Alex_DeLarge;41815338]
Thing is though, the benefits of PS+ outweighs the $4.99 a month, easily. Free games, discounts on games/DLC, exclusive content, additional benefits such as cloud saving and cross-game chat.
[img]http://www.technobuffalo.com/wp-content/uploads/2013/06/PlayStation-Plus-Year-One-Free-Games.png[/img]
I mean this month, we just got Hitman Absolution and BitTripRunner 2.[/QUOTE]
PS+ outweighs Xbox Gold on current gen systems. But we don't know what it'll be like in the future, I don't think either Sony nor Microsoft have shared all the details yet? If someone thinks that you'll get 3 AAA PS4 games every month like you do now with the PS3; you're silly.
[QUOTE=nightlord;41821002]I find it stupid how everyone says things like "It's too late" or "They considered them in the first place so i won't be buying it". The consoles haven't released yet, so it's not too late. There were some alright reasons for what they proposed at first, although i didn't think they were good enough really. Everyone complained and used what the original Xbone one suggestions were to justify hating Microsoft, and now they've changed most things, they are using that they've changed things to justify hating them.
The people who say this doesn't matter now are just looking for any excuse to hate Microsoft. The fact that they changed these policies means they realized what the suggested was wrong and the Xbone one wasn't going to do well with them. They are doing things to make it better, but the way some people respond to it make it seem like that's a bad thing.[/QUOTE]
It, to me, was too late once they announced all of these decisions; yes, sure, it's nice that they are "listening" and what not, but the simple fact MS ever thought all of these "features" (that they have since backpedaled away from) were a good idea is a major cause for concern. If they made bad decision after bad decision before, what's to stop them from doing it again down the road?
Where, on the other hand, Sony has shown common sense from the start, which indicates they are more likely to continue to show common sense in the future. Now, of course, this is just speculation, but history does tend to repeat itself.
[QUOTE=DaMastez;41822439]It, to me, was too late once they announced all of these decisions; yes, sure, it's nice that they are "listening" and what not, but the simple fact MS ever thought all of these "features" (that they have since backpedaled away from) were a good idea is a major cause for concern. If they made bad decision after bad decision before, what's to stop them from doing it again down the road?
Where, on the other hand, Sony has shown common sense from the start, which indicates they are more likely to continue to show common sense in the future. Now, of course, this is just speculation, but history does tend to repeat itself.[/QUOTE]
Yeah, except you don't have to look very far behind to see that Sony has made shitloads of mistakes also. The architecture Sony chose for the PS3 was far from common sense and the system was pretty awful for the first couple years because of that. Not to mention how they stripped out a lot of features the PS3 originally had during it's life cycle.
[QUOTE=Brt5470;41822237]Can you link to that?[/QUOTE]
[url]http://www.reddit.com/r/xboxone/comments/1i71s5/i_am_an_xbox_one_dev_ask_me_almost_anything/cb1ls3d[/url]
[QUOTE=RautaPalli;41822429]PS+ outweighs Xbox Gold on current gen systems. But we don't know what it'll be like in the future, I don't think either Sony nor Microsoft have shared all the details yet? If someone thinks that you'll get 3 AAA PS4 games every month like you do now with the PS3; you're silly.[/QUOTE]
Sony seems to be continuing it into the PS4, along with keeping almost everything but playing of certain games to non-PS+ users, with free to plays, some retail games not requiring it, and extra stuff like streaming and Netflix style apps not needing it. PS+ looks like it's going to be a more reasonable service than Gold, which locks you out of almost all the useful stuff in the console, even if you don't want to play online.
If Sony could give us 3 AAA titles each month this gen, there's nothing stopping them next gen.
While this is good news from MS, the One still is an unappealing console, largely because of how Gold is basically forced on you, and largely because the exclusives just aren't that interesting (the 360 has the exact same problem).
[QUOTE=RautaPalli;41822429]PS+ outweighs Xbox Gold on current gen systems. But we don't know what it'll be like in the future, I don't think either Sony nor Microsoft have shared all the details yet? If someone thinks that you'll get 3 AAA PS4 games every month like you do now with the PS3; you're silly.[/QUOTE]
Driveclub
Warframe
Planetside 2
DC Universe Online
War Thunder
Blacklight Retribution
Don't Starve
Outlast
Secret ponchos
I may have missed a few.
[QUOTE=RautaPalli;41822477]Yeah, except you don't have to look very far behind to see that Sony has made shitloads of mistakes also. The architecture Sony chose for the PS3 was far from common sense and the system was pretty awful for the first couple years because of that. Not to mention how they stripped out a lot of features the PS3 originally had during it's life cycle.[/QUOTE]
The loss of PS2 compatibility does suck, but it lowered the price of the console dramatically, and also improved their lifespan (the cooling solution wasn't really fit for two consoles in one it seems). The software emulation was sketchy so dropping that didn't really hurt them as not too many people gave a shit about that one. The loss of OtherOS was also a non-issue, as if you really were using your PS3 for Linux, you could just not update, the user base was absolutely tiny and very niche. It fixed one of the major security holes through removal, so it's a catch-22, leave it in and not annoy anybody, but risk security even more.
[QUOTE=hexpunK;41822635]The loss of PS2 compatibility does suck, but it lowered the price of the console dramatically, and also improved their lifespan (the cooling solution wasn't really fit for two consoles in one it seems). The software emulation was sketchy so dropping that didn't really hurt them as not too many people gave a shit about that one. The loss of OtherOS was also a non-issue, as if you really were using your PS3 for Linux, you could just not update, the user base was absolutely tiny and very niche. It fixed one of the major security holes through removal, so it's a catch-22, leave it in and not annoy anybody, but risk security even more.[/QUOTE]
Why didn't they just make the PS2-able version a separate console that was available as a special order or something?
[QUOTE=hexpunK;41822611]Sony seems to be continuing it into the PS4, along with keeping almost everything but playing of certain games to non-PS+ users, with free to plays, some retail games not requiring it, and extra stuff like streaming and Netflix style apps not needing it. PS+ looks like it's going to be a more reasonable service than Gold, which locks you out of almost all the useful stuff in the console, even if you don't want to play online.
If Sony could give us 3 AAA titles each month this gen, there's nothing stopping them next gen.[/QUOTE]
I'm talking about what PS+ gets you compared to gold. My argument had nothing to do with what you can do without PS+ or gold. If we're talking about someone that doesn't want to pay for either service then Sony obviously takes the cake there.
And no, I don't believe that for a second. The only reason that works on the PS3 is because they have a huge catalog of old games to choose from. PS+ wasn't nearly as good of a deal during its beginnings on the PS3 either, you didn't get nearly as many games as you do now.
[QUOTE=Zombie man70;41822616]Driveclub
Warframe
Planetside 2
DC Universe Online
War Thunder
Blacklight Retribution
Don't Starve
Outlast
Secret ponchos
I may have missed a few.[/QUOTE]
Most of these are free to play games. They shouldn't require PS+ in the first place, and as far as I know they don't, which is good. I don't think Sony has given out any details on how the instant game collection will work on the PS4, which is what I'm talking about since that's what the picture is of. If I remember correctly it still exists, but we don't know what the roster is like.
[QUOTE=RautaPalli;41822799]And no, I don't believe that for a second. The only reason that works on the PS3 is because they have a huge catalog of old games to choose from. PS+ wasn't nearly as good of a deal during its beginnings on the PS3 either, you didn't get nearly as many games as you do now.[/QUOTE]
lmao. Of course PS+ wasn't good at the start of the PS3 lifespan, it didn't exist back then. It was introduced around a third or half way through the generation, and offered very little. It started offering games when they had a decent back catalog. Who's to say they aren't doing the same thing for the PS4? Sony haven't confirmed or denied anything yet other than PS+ still exists. Maybe once the library gets bigger we'll see what we have currently again?
Either way it's a much better attempt at it than Gold has been, the games offered that I've seen are all fairly average or indie games that weren't selling greatly.
[QUOTE=hexpunK;41823169]lmao. Of course PS+ wasn't good at the start of the PS3 lifespan, it didn't exist back then. It was introduced around a third or half way through the generation, and offered very little. It started offering games when they had a decent back catalog. Who's to say they aren't doing the same thing for the PS4? Sony haven't confirmed or denied anything yet other than PS+ still exists. Maybe once the library gets bigger we'll see what we have currently again?
Either way it's a much better attempt at it than Gold has been, the games offered that I've seen are all fairly average or indie games that weren't selling greatly.[/QUOTE]
I never talked about the start of the PS3 lifespan. I said the beginnings of PS+, not PS3. And yeah, that's my point. We simply don't know yet. Referencing to the current PS3 PS+ roster doesn't really mean anything when it comes to the PS4, just like what Gold offers now doesn't have much to do with the XBone.
The cool thing about the 360 instant game collection (or w/e it's called) is that you actually own those games, you keep them even once your subscription runs out. Although their roster sucks right now anyway so I don't really care personally :v:. Has Microsoft talked about whether the monthly games thing will continue on the XBone?
What micrisoft tried to do was complete horseshit, plus its over £400
And lets just be COMPLETELY transparent here, If the PS4 did outsell the Xbox One in preorders two fold they would never have made these changes, So when the people cry out about the restrictions nothing happens when the figures come in that the Competition is shitting on them they " Listen to their loyal consumers" Thats how the damage is done, that's why they have lost a great deal of their market.
And to those who are going to be upset by my opinion and call me a "PS Fanboy" or whatever, Im upgrading my PC next Gen and sticking to it.
So try to make an unbiased opinion and untwist yer' knickers.
[QUOTE=Viper1204;41823266]What micrisoft tried to do was complete horseshit, plus its over £400
And lets just be COMPLETELY transparent here, If the PS4 did outsell the Xbox One in preorders two fold they would never have made these changes, So when the people cry out about the restrictions nothing happens when the figures come in that the Competition is shitting on them they " Listen to their loyal consumers" Thats how the damage is done, that's why they have lost a great deal of their market.
And to those who are going to be upset by my opinion and call me a "PS Fanboy" or whatever, Im upgrading my PC next Gen and sticking to it.
So try to make an unbiased opinion and untwist yer' knickers.[/QUOTE]
Microsoft listens to consumers to keep up? You mean the point of the entire thread? Quit being a cartoon.
[QUOTE=RautaPalli;41822799]I'm talking about what PS+ gets you compared to gold. My argument had nothing to do with what you can do without PS+ or gold. If we're talking about someone that doesn't want to pay for either service then Sony obviously takes the cake there.
And no, I don't believe that for a second. The only reason that works on the PS3 is because they have a huge catalog of old games to choose from. PS+ wasn't nearly as good of a deal during its beginnings on the PS3 either, you didn't get nearly as many games as you do now.
Most of these are free to play games. They shouldn't require PS+ in the first place, and as far as I know they don't, which is good. I don't think Sony has given out any details on how the instant game collection will work on the PS4, which is what I'm talking about since that's what the picture is of. If I remember correctly it still exists, but we don't know what the roster is like.[/QUOTE]
Free to play actually doesn't require PS+
[editline]13th August 2013[/editline]
Also, PS+ had great games in the beginning, but it came out later in the PS3's lifespan.
[editline]13th August 2013[/editline]
As far as I know PS+ is going to be one triple A title (like it is now), and a whole bunch of indie games
Oh, good. Now I'm actually interested in buying one of these things. I really do wish they'd offer a kinect-free bundle, but if the console will run just fine without the kinect connected at all I'm now open to the idea of owning one.
[quote]We also strongly believe that once you try the all-new Kinect and the game and entertainment experiences it enhances or enables, you won’t want to use your Xbox One without it.[/quote]
Sorry, Microsoft, but the only experience the Kinect will ever enhance for me is my marksmanship skills. I'm a bit rusty, I have 300 or so rounds of .22 Long Rifle just collecting dust, and I live out in the countryside where I can turn my backyard into a firing range without endangering anybody. A Kinect sounds like quite the nice target to use for a little practice.....
[QUOTE=nigerianprince;41820181]
I'm still kind of amazed how much of a stink people kicked up over second hand games when you see what is possible without them (online libraries of 500+ games which are instantly available, i.e. steam).
[/QUOTE]
I should be able to buy and sell games on eBay no differently than I can toasters or cars. It's really that simple. Plus I can't fucking afford $60 for a new title. Used games are the only way I can afford to enjoy this hobby at all.
Sorry, you need to Log In to post a reply to this thread.
