New XBox

[Ark Malmeida]

3: MS still can't touch the library of exclusives that Sony has.

Man, I couldn't disagree more with that statement. The only Sony games that I would love to have the ability to play are the Uncharted games and Heavy Rain. Nothing else that they have interests me in the slightest.

 

[kimkom]

Battlefield 4 was in game. But it was running on a PC

Ha ha, nice I didn't see that.

 

[spoonman]

Man, I couldn't disagree more with that statement. The only Sony games that I would love to have the ability to play are the Uncharted games and Heavy Rain. Nothing else that they have interests me in the slightest.

I'm fine with that. Everyone is entitled to their own opinion.

I used to game on both sytems and when my Xbox died I found myself not missing it as much as i thought i would.

There were a few games I wanted to play such as Castle Crashers, Braid, Limbo, GTA IV Episodes, and Mass Effect 1, but those all ended up coming out on the PS3.

Then I found myself really getting into the Sony exclusives...inFAMOUS, Ratchet & Clank, Metal Gear Solid, Uncharted, Resistance, Killzone, Heavy Rain, MotorStorm, Twisted Metal, Wipeout HD, Dead Nation, LittleBigPlanet, God of War III (was such a masterpiece!)

Sony really started picking it up with indie stuff too: PixelJunk Shooter, Flower, Guacamelee, Sound Shapes, Super StarDust HD, Unfinished Swan, Shatter, etc.

Xbox often gets billed as the SHMUP's console king, thanks to Cave, but the PS3 has some really excellent shooters as well. (Sine Mora, Soldner X 2, Under Defeat HD, 1942 Joint Strike). OK, so I have to admit I DO miss those Cave shooters! Hehe

I think the biggest draw for me was PSN Plus. I signed up for $50 for 15 months.
Sony has been quite generous with the free games and discounts (The Pinball Arcade was free this week for both PS3 & PS Vita).

Speaking of which, if you own a Vita, the PS3 makes even more sense to buy games for.
Many games (TPA & Zen Pinball included) are "Cross-Buy" which is when they give away the Vita port for free when you buy the PS3 version. It's definitely a nice perk.

It's fun to look forward to getting new freebies & discounts each week too.

To be honest I think the real value here is the 2GB of cloud saving, auto game patching, and trophy syncing that comes free with Plus. It saved my ass when my hdd became corrupted last year. Though I had many of my saves backed up on a USB stick, thy were not up to date, and I couldn't back up quite a lot of the "protected saves". So the cloud had me covered!
$4/month is worth it alone for piece of mind.

One last thing, then I will shut up about the PS3 ...
There is something called "Cross-Controller" where the Vita can be used along with the PS3. It's only currently utilized by a few games, but it would be great if Farsight would consider taking advantage of this. As they have done with the Wii U, the portable unit can be used as the DMD. The OLED screen on the Vita would look awesome displaying this.

 

[shutyertrap]

This cracked me up when I saw it...

Sony was pretty smart not to show their console, because after this lump of plastic, anything they come up with will be hailed as pure design innovation!

Ya know, I heard it before, that MS was going more after the threat of Google and Apple entering the TV market. Have to see whether that was smart or not, but based off the reactions I've been seeing, they just face planted on the sidewalk. Every move they make from now until release will be trying to get customer confidence back, no easy task.

To put it another way, this is MicroSoft becoming Mitt Romney after that video leaked, and Sony being Obama trying not to do anything too stupid to but the advantage back on a level playing ground. Ugly box, locked out used or shared games, always on Kinect spying on you, flipping the finger at any customer that isn't a US tv watcher...

Should be an interesting E3!

 

[xAzatothx]

This gen will likely be more of a sidestep into other areas rather than a hardcore gaming machine (we need another tech revolution before that happens again).

As I thought - MS clearly don't think the current technology allows a pure gaming machine to be sold in large numbers. The increment in performance is just too small. The same old games released every year has quashed consumer appetite.

Given MS have pretty much abandoned Windows Media Center, I was hopeful of a little more in the live TV department from Xbox One.

 

[kimkom]

This cracked me up when I saw it...

That simply has to be a limited edition release!

 

[Gord Lacey]

So it seems MS has decided they are going to be an "everything" machine, instead of a gaming machine. That explains the design - which is made to look like something that fits alongside other components, not a gaming machine - and the focus on TV and all that. I already have a cable box/PVR, so something like this doesn't interest me. I want to play games on my gaming device, or watch movies on a disc (I have a disc playing in my PS3 right now). MS is clearly going after a different market with this announcement.

A friend told me they're pushing the TV thing because they want cable companies to offer these under contract - sign up for X years and only pay $Y for the device. That makes sense, and could be their "in" for getting into a lot of homes.

They definitely took a different approach to their unveil than Sony took. Sony was all about "the games" and changes that relate to "the games," while MS was about pretty much everything but "the games."

 

[Ark Malmeida]

So for all of you complaining that this is an "everything" machine, do you think that it won't still play games? MS has repeatedly said that the E3 presentation in 18 days will be all about upcoming games, but everyone is choosing to ignore that. If it still plays great looking games, why does it matter what else it does? If you don't like those features, then you don't have to use them. Microsoft is banking on having those features be a selling point to get more consoles in homes. A bigger install base means more third party investment to get their games out to that install base.

I just don't get the whole "it does all of this other stupid stuff - what about us gamers?!?" argument.

And as far as the design goes, maybe it is ugly (I personally think it's fine and functional looking), but would you rather have a system that's built for function and to last for a long time (notice all of the ventilation), or a repeat of the red ring of death issues?

 

[smbhax]

When the 360 came out people were already calling the original Xbox, the "Xbox 1". I guess the Xbox 720 was too obvious. Either that or some shmuck bought the domain as soon as the 360 was announced.

Hm if we can't call it the XB1, does that mean we're stuck with XBO? Ew.

 

[xAzatothx]

still interested to see what comes from the new kinect tech. If the specs and marketing hype is to be believed - it could be quite an improvement.

Also what about IllumiRoom?

 

[George Klepacz]

I don't like the name, but other than that, I'm interested in what try show for games at E3.

 

[SKILL_SHOT]

I only care about what the games look like. I dont buy a console based on its looks.

 

[DrainoBraino]

I know what you mean by "looks", but I think thats the problem with the new generation of games. Too much focus on graphics. also, every game is a FPS. I can't get into FPS.

I need some strategy games, RPG's, and adventure games. Guess I'll cross my fingers until E3

 

[shutyertrap]

I only care about what the games look like. I dont buy a console based on its looks.

Tell that to Apple.

Tell that to Sony and MicroSoft every time they came out with a special color unit. Or when they came out with 'slim' versions.

This is your big unveil, you want to put your best foot forward, and this quite clearly was not it.

 

[Dutch Pinball ball]

If it still plays great looking games, why does it matter what else it does? If you don't like those features, then you don't have to use them. ?

Are you serious?

I want to play the best games possible.

All other crap i dont need when i buy a game console.

Dont use it, ok. But i paid for ot. I paid for kinect, i paid for that sports layout, for skype etc etc.

I would rather have a cheaper console or have all that waisted money invested into grafix cards, memory, that sort of stuff. To get even better games!




By the way, i dont care how it looks. But got to say, i find it unbelievable that a billion dollar company comes up with a WWII secret resistance radio looking console in 2013.

 

[karl]

I asked my tech guru what all the hubbub was about and he sent me this...

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KbWgUO-Rqcw

I'm not impressed with TV as it already is.

This made my day watching this right after the whole hours long sleeping pill was a hoot

But to put on my serious hat for just a moment, Why is this a surprise? This is what they have been aiming for since the first xbox. I remember using it as a media center and enjoying that feature. Nothing wrong with having a new media hub if the games do not suffer. My AC Ryan is starting to get old so if this will work nicely with my nas server I have no problem with that. I also like how smooth the voice commands could be if the demonstration is accurate of how it will be in real life.

I play a lot less games now than before so extra media features is not a downer for me. Now if I were a heavy duty gamer on the other hand, I would be a bit more upset.

I will wait to see what console tpa is best with before my final decision but I kinda miss my old Beta player from the 80' and this box could help with that nostalgia trip

 

[Ark Malmeida]

Well said Karl - that's the exact impression that I was trying to get across. Until I see otherwise, I'll keep thinking that their E3 presentation will show all the people complaining about the lack of games what they want to see. The argument about Kinect and all of the non-gaming features taking away from the hardware or resources that could be used on games is silly IMO. That stuff is extra, to try and entice a much broader base of users. I highly doubt that they would add a better graphics processor or more RAM if they didn't have those features in there.

 

[Tabe]

Too much focus on graphics. also, every game is a FPS. I can't get into FPS.

C'mon. In 2012, four of the top 10 best-sellers were FPS's. The idea that every game is an FPS is a wild exaggeration with no basis in reality.

I need some strategy games, RPG's, and adventure games. Guess I'll cross my fingers until E3

Strategy games will always be tough on consoles because of the input devices but RPGs and adventure games are alive and well. It was a PS3-exclusive but the RPG Ni No Kuni has been a massive hit this year, for example.

 

[Tabe]

Man, I couldn't disagree more with that statement. The only Sony games that I would love to have the ability to play are the Uncharted games and Heavy Rain. Nothing else that they have interests me in the slightest.

By contrast, the only 360 exclusive I care about would be Forza. I'd pick up Gears of War, too, but that's more an afterthought. Sony has done well this generation with their exclusives - God of War, Uncharted, Infamous, Last of Us, Killzone, Resistance, Metal Gear Solid, Ni No Kuni, Little Big Planet, Wipeout, Ratchet & Clank, Gran Turismo, MLB: The Show, and on and on. By any definition, Sony has an outstanding batch of exclusive titles and franchises for the PS3.

 

[bavelb]

So for all of you complaining that this is an "everything" machine, do you think that it won't still play games? MS has repeatedly said that the E3 presentation in 18 days will be all about upcoming games, but everyone is choosing to ignore that.

Because their focus and interest clearly isnt in bringing us the best games possible. They want a jack of all trades. It's likely that thats where the money is, and as a business it might be the smarter deal.

I just don't get the whole "it does all of this other stupid stuff - what about us gamers?!?" argument.

I still get to pay for all those features I don't want, including kinect and 3 GB of RAM thats going into multitasking that I won't use. So for likely the same amount of money I get 8 GB of DDR5 instead of 5 GB of DDR3 and a GPU thats 150% the performance of MS's. Plus support from a company that more clearly has the interest of gamers at heart (because they HAVE to).

I highly doubt that they would add a better graphics processor or more RAM if they didn't have those features in there.

But it would be cheaper by a bigger margin.



Let me reitterate: from a business point of view this is likely the BEST MS can do to turn the biggest profit (IF they pull it of in this day and age of more and more people disconnecting their cables and going streaming/TV-a-la-Cart) possible. But as a gamer, I want the company that specializes in that. Compare it to a retailoutlet: Wallmart, Tesco's and Mediamarkt (european store) turn much bigger profits than specialized gamestores (onj-or offline). Yet I have more fun shopping at a smaller gameshop.