I should probably avoid this thread anyway... I just don't think it's cool for a person to insult my entire development team like we're creating bad applications and THAT'S why Azure drops connections. That's when I take things personal.
That's exactly the kind of problem I'm talking about, where I don't think there would be any actual hostility between Syndalis and yourself but because you've both had different experiences of the same thing, it feels like you're both trying to combat each other's information. You've had a terrible time with Azure, but he's confident that if it were entirely the fault of Azure, it would be much bigger news and you'd be getting all manner of reimbursement from them for the trouble, so he feels the need to hit back with a blanket "it's your IT staff being bad", which angers you, and round we go. He feels like you're exaggerating the problem because you're biased, you feel like he's downplaying your problem because he's biased. Really, everyone's just trying to get somewhere. Group hug.
I should probably avoid this thread anyway... I just don't think it's cool for a person to insult my entire development team like we're creating bad applications and THAT'S why Azure drops connections. That's when I take things personal.
Yeah, that's not cool.
IDK. I think both platforms have something to nice offer and I'm likely going to end up with both. When you're not fighting a "product war" and people in general seem to be acting in a way that they are it just gets irritating. From phones, tablets, consoles... and soda... all that nonsense just irks me. But eh...
I'll admit that, personally, I've reached the point where -- fair or not -- anything negative said about the system that is presented with snark gets lumped into the "this opinion does not affect me and does not endear me to their plight in any way" category. That isn't because I don't care about the people feelings of the people that have those opinions. It's more that I've probably heard each argument a hundred times already, and the hundred-and-first time won't change my mind. Especially when it's become less about the argument and more about the "I can out-snark you" aspect.
The "I TOLD YOU SO!" crowd is pretty fucking annoying, to put it bluntly. So is the "MAN, YOU ACTUALLY THOUGHT THAT?!" crowd. That's not everyone here, but after a while, all the arguments, complaints and general sarcasm become a blur and the points are lost along the way.
Here's what I think: the Xbox One is going to be another console that I will have a large selection of games to play on (that will also be available on the PS4), using a controller design that I vastly prefer over the competition's, with an online structure that not only has proven to be preferable to the competition's but probably, in all likelihood, will be improved upon. The controller design, online structure and exclusives (both announced and potential) are enough to persuade me to pay $100 more than Sony's offering. That doesn't even touch on the Kinect integration, media capabilities or cloud potential. Those things are bonuses to me.
Aside from the price, controller and exclusives, these systems are nearly identical. On paper the PS4 is more powerful. You know what my experience from the last generation tells me? That only matters for exclusive titles; nothing more. The differences between multi-platform titles was negligible from my perspective (unless you start talking about add-on content at which point the argument has moved on from "system power makes version X better/worse than version Y").
People seem to be getting personally offended by the extraneous details:
You're outside the US and won't benefit from the media integration? Microsoft is a western company whose primary audience for their console is the United States. You can still play games on it, so its core function still applies to you.
• You're paying $100 extra for useless media integration? No. You're paying for Kinect, plain and simple - OR - you don't have to buy it.
• You don't like/want Kinect? That's fine, you can turn it off - OR - you don't have to buy it.
• Your definition of "off" differs from Microsoft's? You're being a goose; you won't have to use it if you don't want to - OR - you don't have to buy it.
• You think Microsoft/the government is spying on you? I'm not in control of that, so I can't tell you you're wrong. What I can tell you is that you've now reached a point where the other console is going to be better for your peace of mind - AND - you don't have to buy it.
• You think Microsoft is selling to people based on meaningless buzzwords? I hate to break it to you, but so does basically every other company out there. You're smarter/more informed than the average gamer so feel free to shake your head, but try not to take it personally - AND - you don't have to buy it.
• You think that someone on the internet is wrong? Maybe they are; maybe they aren't. It's not worth flipping out over.
The point is that one console, the PS4, is primarily for people who just want to play games: no muss, no fuss. The Xbox One is for people who want something more. If you don't like what it offers, don't get mad at those of us that do. If you are mad because you want that something more and you feel left out because it won't apply to you? You're justified; I feel for you. Thing is, I don't think I've seen anyone actually make that argument yet.
TL;DR - Death of Rats was right: this isn't the console wars thread. If you can't make your point without doing so from an "I'm going to tear this fucker down" perspective, stop and ask yourself: do you really need to?
I'm not one to hold grudges though. So outside this thread we're still cool syndalis.
But in here... We're mortal enemies.
urahonky on
+1
fearsomepirateI ate a pickle once.Registered Userregular
edited June 2013
Some of us are way past the "console war" mentality (at some point after becoming an adult, you realize console makers are businesses just like Walmart and Burger King), but have fresh memories of buying consoles that ended up having poor software support because the hardware didn't move units. And some of us, and obviously including myself here, think the Xbox One is going to thud in the marketplace, and that's why we discuss the negatives.
fearsomepirate on
Nobody makes me bleed my own blood...nobody.
PSN ID: fearsomepirate
Some of us are way past the "console war" mentality (at some point after becoming an adult, you realize console makers are businesses just like Walmart and Burger King), but have fresh memories of buying consoles that ended up having poor software support because the hardware didn't move units. And some of us, and obviously including myself here, think the Xbox One is going to thud in the marketplace, and that's why we discuss the negatives.
But you can see how that might feel like a kind of self-fulfilling prophecy? You worry it'll have poor support and nobody will buy it leading to it having poor support, so you adopt a negative tone to warn people of your fears it'll sell badly, and.. round it goes. I'm not asking for a ball of sunshine or to ignore the negatives, but when it feels like that's all anyone wants to talk about, it'll end up either driving away the other half of the discussion, or sending it down to the Console Wars trenches.
edit: again, obviously, this goes both ways too. A thread that's entirely about positives with all bad points being stamped out, will just feel like a PR orgy and won't help anyone know what they're really spending their money on. Needs both sides working to balance it.
Kind of reminds me of the WiiU's situation. Consoles don't sell because of lack of games, and games aren't being developed because of lack of console sales.
0
Vicious_GSRDudePrincipality of ZeonRegistered Userregular
The console war isn't a mentality, it's a real thing. It's multiple companies fighting for the top spot in console sales. The widespread biased childish attitude that gamers bring to the table "OMFG PS3 IS TEH SUX" makes it seem less real than it is.
I should probably avoid this thread anyway... I just don't think it's cool for a person to insult my entire development team like we're creating bad applications and THAT'S why Azure drops connections. That's when I take things personal.
Yeah, that's not cool.
IDK. I think both platforms have something to nice offer and I'm likely going to end up with both. When you're not fighting a "product war" and people in general seem to be acting in a way that they are it just gets irritating. From phones, tablets, consoles... and soda... all that nonsense just irks me. But eh...
Failed the Pepsi challenge then, is that it?
Much like fine wines, each soda is good with a certain snack or food. Except Dr. Pepper, which is always horrible with anything.
Anyway, I don't even understand why "winning" or "losing" a product war is even relevant in an adult's life. You buy one platform, you play its games, you have fun. Does it really matter if the console is a failure? You buy one console, you do not have fun (or it fails because it's no longer supported), buy another platform; problem solved. It just seems like an arbitrary limitation...
The other thing is the presentation of the negative opinions that incites arguments instead of simply stating opinion:
"I don't like how Microsoft presented and handled this policy. They should have done this." vs... "This is just another example of the gross incompetence of Microsoft's executives, the final straw in a long string of missteps and errors and they should have known that instead of doing it this way doing it that way... and such" and it's just wtf.
tastydonuts on
“I used to draw, hard to admit that I used to draw...”
Some of us are way past the "console war" mentality (at some point after becoming an adult, you realize console makers are businesses just like Walmart and Burger King), but have fresh memories of buying consoles that ended up having poor software support because the hardware didn't move units. And some of us, and obviously including myself here, think the Xbox One is going to thud in the marketplace, and that's why we discuss the negatives.
I don't think there is any change the Xbox One thuds in the marketplace. The early Call of Duty content alone will prevent that.
The console war isn't a mentality, it's a real thing. It's multiple companies fighting for the top spot in console sales. The widespread biased childish attitude that gamers bring to the table "OMFG PS3 IS TEH SUX" makes it seem less real than it is.
So let the companies have their fight. Nobody got hurt by deciding not to give a toss if an Xbox sold more or less than a Playstation. If you want to discuss financials, there's an Industry thread for doing exactly that, but all the 'Console Wars' gets here is heated arguments and pointless divisions drawn between people just trying to discuss the pros and cons of details we won't be certain about for another 5/6 months. It causes a petty, childish, tribal attitude that doesn't progress anything.
This is good news. More interesting though is the game audio coming out of the new controller port. This has been mentioned, but I would love to be able to have a headset play game audio and chat audio without having to be tethered to me TV and console. This is great.
The console war isn't a mentality, it's a real thing. It's multiple companies fighting for the top spot in console sales. The widespread biased childish attitude that gamers bring to the table "OMFG PS3 IS TEH SUX" makes it seem less real than it is.
No, it's definitely a mentality. Microsoft isn't at war with sony isn't at war with google isn't at war with apple. They put out competing products sometime. More often than not, however, they work together. They make deals. They are members of an industry. Microsoft will "go to war with apple" in the public mindset, then turn around and make 10 backroom deals to get their software on apple products. It's not Sony vs Microsoft. It's consumers vs business.
It's like, ok, the NBA, right? Those teams compete against each other, right? But no NBA team wants to see another NBA team completely crash and burn, because it hurts their business as a whole. They're a union of competing entities. It's not war.
The console war isn't a mentality, it's a real thing. It's multiple companies fighting for the top spot in console sales. The widespread biased childish attitude that gamers bring to the table "OMFG PS3 IS TEH SUX" makes it seem less real than it is.
So let the companies have their fight. Nobody got hurt by deciding not to give a toss if an Xbox sold more or less than a Playstation. If you want to discuss financials, there's an Industry thread for doing exactly that, but all the 'Console Wars' gets here is heated arguments and pointless divisions drawn between people just trying to discuss the pros and cons of details we won't be certain about for another 5/6 months. It causes a petty, childish, tribal attitude that doesn't progress anything.
I agree that some people take it the wrong way. I look at the console wars as a positive note. It means the companies are fighting for my dollar, and that gets me better value for what I buy. At the end of the day all I want to do is play cool games, the platform the game is on usually doesn't interest me all that much.
Also I spoke about this exact issue recently, but like, with spoken words and a camera.
This is good news. More interesting though is the game audio coming out of the new controller port. This has been mentioned, but I would love to be able to have a headset play game audio and chat audio without having to be tethered to me TV and console. This is great.
Yeah, that is a HUGE selling point to me.
This means that I can hook a headset up to my controller, leave the sound bar off in my living room, and play mah halo at 3am with the volume turned up to 11 without pissing off neighbors.
This will probably make me invest in a very expensive headset this gen that is completely proprietary (oh noes), because my television, blu rays, streaming content, and everything else will pipe through that headset just fine, with the added benefit of live voice chat.
That said, you know if Microsoft doesn't do it, some enterprising 3rd party developer will make the "puck" bit with a standard minijack for the xbox 360 headsets.
The only 360 peripheral support I feel microsoft needs to care about are the ones that are almost pure HID - stuff like arcade sticks that were mentioned earlier by Inquisitor. Regular controllers and whatnot are lacking some core features I want the developers to focus on (like the new rumble tech) and I would rather they just not be an option, especially since there is no backwards compatibility with software.
SW-4158-3990-6116
Let's play Mario Kart or something...
NBA is different, though. If Sony crashes and burns then that means Microsoft eats up the market share and makes $Texas.
It depends on why Sony would be crashing and burning. If Sony's crash and burn directly correlates into microsoft sales, sure. Like for every playstation NOT sold, it would be an Xbox sold, then of course they'll take that. But it's rarely that cut and dry. They'd much rather maintain the status quo than really shake up the industry.
It'd be more like if a new, non-gaming interactive medium sprang up that was in competition to microsoft and sony's model. Like say gaming suddenly starts dropping off dramatically in favor of holodeck plays, a field neither microsoft nor sony have stake in. Microsoft, in that case, sure as shit doesn't want Sony to crash and burn. They want their industry to stay supported.
EDIT: Going back to the NBA analogy - teams may want to win over the other team, but the heat don't want the bulls organization to crumble because people are watching football, because that hurts their bottom line as well. Thus, you'll never see Microsoft coming out and slamming Sony's JRPGs as boring or whatever, because they're selling the same product.
EDIT AGAIN: Or, to provide a better counter-example: you want to see war? War is what the NRA is waging on video games. Where they have no bottom line to maintain.
And I'm saying that if people don't draw those lines and start attaching their emotional well-being to the sales performance of a console, the level of discussion will drastically improve. It's like, I used to follow football a lot more closely than I do now, and I'm a Spurs fan. They would consistently play badly every weekend, to a point that I would start to dread Saturdays because I was expecting my team of choice to lose. Eventually I realised that they would keep going just the same as ever whether I cared or not, and that if I decided I didn't care any more, I could enjoy my day much better. They still played and won or lost, I could look in and go "oh well" or "hey, cool", but I felt much better for letting that go. Same as here, there's a level of interest which is appropriate, but when it gets to 'console wars' and people get genuinely heated over what others are thinking or saying about a games console, that's when you should consider what you're getting out of it, versus what you're putting in.
This is good news. More interesting though is the game audio coming out of the new controller port. This has been mentioned, but I would love to be able to have a headset play game audio and chat audio without having to be tethered to me TV and console. This is great.
Yeah, that is a HUGE selling point to me.
This means that I can hook a headset up to my controller, leave the sound bar off in my living room, and play mah halo at 3am with the volume turned up to 11 without pissing off neighbors.
This will probably make me invest in a very expensive headset this gen that is completely proprietary (oh noes), because my television, blu rays, streaming content, and everything else will pipe through that headset just fine, with the added benefit of live voice chat.
That said, you know if Microsoft doesn't do it, some enterprising 3rd party developer will make the "puck" bit with a standard minijack for the xbox 360 headsets.
The only 360 peripheral support I feel microsoft needs to care about are the ones that are almost pure HID - stuff like arcade sticks that were mentioned earlier by Inquisitor. Regular controllers and whatnot are lacking some core features I want the developers to focus on (like the new rumble tech) and I would rather they just not be an option, especially since there is no backwards compatibility with software.
I have a $30 Turtlebeach headset that is just awesome. I frequently play later on at night when my wife and kids are sleeping and being able to turn down the volume of the TV and have everything come through the headset is excellent. However, I would buy a new headset in a second (depending on price of course) if I could connect it directly to the controller.
Some people can't do that though darleysam. I know people that have an emotional response to their team losing or winning. You can't just expect everyone to turn that part of their brain off.
And I'm saying that if people don't draw those lines and start attaching their emotional well-being to the sales performance of a console, the level of discussion will drastically improve. It's like, I used to follow football a lot more closely than I do now, and I'm a Spurs fan. They would consistently play badly every weekend, to a point that I would start to dread Saturdays because I was expecting my team of choice to lose. Eventually I realised that they would keep going just the same as ever whether I cared or not, and that if I decided I didn't care any more, I could enjoy my day much better. They still played and won or lost, I could look in and go "oh well" or "hey, cool", but I felt much better for letting that go. Same as here, there's a level of interest which is appropriate, but when it gets to 'console wars' and people get genuinely heated over what others are thinking or saying about a games console, that's when you should consider what you're getting out of it, versus what you're putting in.
At the same time, some arguments aren't "console wars." I've said over and over again that nothing I'm saying in this thread stems from some sort of schadenfreude against microsoft. Some people in this thread have vested interests in this medium. There's a difference between someone campaigning for one artist over another because he is emotionally invested in that artist, and someone campaigning for one artist over another because that artist represents a growing trend within the medium. It's possible to actually worry about the health of the medium, and to care about the medium itself.
Now, granted, that's just opinion. There is no intrinsically honest or true opinion about what the medium should or shouldn't be. Someone can legitimately disagree that one trend is dangerous.
This is good news. More interesting though is the game audio coming out of the new controller port. This has been mentioned, but I would love to be able to have a headset play game audio and chat audio without having to be tethered to me TV and console. This is great.
If this means the USB fighting stick I have for the 360 works, then two thumbs up for me.
+1
AegeriTiny wee bacteriumsPlateau of LengRegistered Userregular
And I'm saying that if people don't draw those lines and start attaching their emotional well-being to the sales performance of a console, the level of discussion will drastically improve.
I dunno, when you have been a supporter of a certain console for a long time in buying software, subscriptions and DLC on their platform, then they make numerous disagreeable decisions it is more than worth commentary. Especially when it's the case one company donates most of their entire reveal to features that won't work in your country at launch and won't for a nebulous period afterwards. Or the numerous other entirely valid concerns that if properly addressed, especially after MS did the right thing on other areas, would go a long way to making the console an actually attractive option again. I feel when certain people then go declaring these issues "Petty", when they are actually still important issues to many I would sincerely question who is actually lowering the level of discussion in this thread. Or alternatively when all the actual contribution amounts to sarcastic comments like saying NZ makes "Sour grapes". No, being treated by a company you've supported for years like you're an irrelevant customer, that is what makes "Sour grapes".
I have certainly called out people on "my side" several times and just as vigorously as anyone else I think is making a silly argument (EG the xbone games running on PCs e3 pictures non-issue) as well.
And I'm saying that if people don't draw those lines and start attaching their emotional well-being to the sales performance of a console, the level of discussion will drastically improve. It's like, I used to follow football a lot more closely than I do now, and I'm a Spurs fan. They would consistently play badly every weekend, to a point that I would start to dread Saturdays because I was expecting my team of choice to lose. Eventually I realised that they would keep going just the same as ever whether I cared or not, and that if I decided I didn't care any more, I could enjoy my day much better. They still played and won or lost, I could look in and go "oh well" or "hey, cool", but I felt much better for letting that go. Same as here, there's a level of interest which is appropriate, but when it gets to 'console wars' and people get genuinely heated over what others are thinking or saying about a games console, that's when you should consider what you're getting out of it, versus what you're putting in.
At the same time, some arguments aren't "console wars." I've said over and over again that nothing I'm saying in this thread stems from some sort of schadenfreude against microsoft. Some people in this thread have vested interests in this medium. There's a difference between someone campaigning for one artist over another because he is emotionally invested in that artist, and someone campaigning for one artist over another because that artist represents a growing trend within the medium. It's possible to actually worry about the health of the medium, and to care about the medium itself.
Now, granted, that's just opinion. There is no intrinsically honest or true opinion about what the medium should or shouldn't be. Someone can legitimately disagree that one trend is dangerous.
Completely agree, and I guess my point is that it's for everyone to police themselves as best as they can, to consider what they're saying and how. I know I've had to delete a few posts because I've felt a need to say something snarky back about someone, and I've probably let some stuff through the filter that hasn't helped. And likewise, if I can trust that I'm doing my best to be fair and accepting, then I can hope that others are doing the same thing and.
0
syndalisGetting ClassyOn the WallRegistered User, Loves Apple Productsregular
Some people can't do that though darleysam. I know people that have an emotional response to their team losing or winning. You can't just expect everyone to turn that part of their brain off.
And honestly, I am not trying to rain on anyone's parade. Period.
I just get mad (sometimes irrationally so, admittedly) at people who not only take an opposing point of view, but ramp up the hyperbole just a wee bit more than is necessary. If there weren't phrases like "Syndalis says the internet runs on rainbows and unicorn farts," in response to me being excited about dedicated servers that do more than just host matches for the XBO, especially considering my line of work deals with the ups and downs of maintaining services over the internet, I would probably not be as snarky as I have gotten.
Either way, I pretty much drew a line in the sand and won't be responding to any posts like that, even if they are quoting me out of turn or doing nonsense like what I quoted above, because I don't want to drag the discourse down here any more than it already has been.
And I am not trying to trash your team, urahonky. I know what I said was impolite, and I apologize. And I don't doubt you are having a problem, but everything I know about these services leads me to believe that the problem probably exists in some place not azure proper. Especially if it is happening at the times you specify. Too many large organizations moving many billions of dollars a year through that infrastructure to allow for it to be that spotty. Xbox live, which is already running in Azure, would not enjoy the kind of reliability people praise it for. Skype would be a hot mess if it intermittently dropped calls every 5 minutes.
So big money really is on either somewhere between your locale and Azure is having issues, or a timed system event/CRON process gone amok.
SW-4158-3990-6116
Let's play Mario Kart or something...
+1
AegeriTiny wee bacteriumsPlateau of LengRegistered Userregular
Some people can't do that though darleysam. I know people that have an emotional response to their team losing or winning. You can't just expect everyone to turn that part of their brain off.
And honestly, I am not trying to rain on anyone's parade. Period.
I just get mad (sometimes irrationally so, admittedly) at people who not only take an opposing point of view, but ramp up the hyperbole just a wee bit more than is necessary. If there weren't phrases like "Syndalis says the internet runs on rainbows and unicorn farts," in response to me being excited about dedicated servers that do more than just host matches for the XBO, especially considering my line of work deals with the ups and downs of maintaining services over the internet, I would probably not be as snarky as I have gotten.
The hypocrisy here is wonderful, considering my response is to a post where you are basically upset that people internationally may have problems with azure servers that make them a less than idea solution. If you didn't write such disdain for the opinions of others with different connection issues, maybe I wouldn't have wrote that but do go on pretending you are not part of the problem with the way you cherry pick PR statements that suit your arguments and wilfully ignore every point made to you.
the two free games a month think that MS announced at E3 is that a Xbox one thing or just a 360 thing until the launch of the xbox one?
The current program is pretty clear about it being for the 360 only, and only until the end of the year. No idea if the program will carry over to Xbox One, nor how it would look on that console.
They should launch the Xbox One by giving everyone who buys one every launch game for free pre-loaded on the console.
the two free games a month think that MS announced at E3 is that a Xbox one thing or just a 360 thing until the launch of the xbox one?
The current program is pretty clear about it being for the 360 only, and only until the end of the year. No idea if the program will carry over to Xbox One, nor how it would look on that console.
They should launch the Xbox One by giving everyone who buys one every launch game for free pre-loaded on the console.
the two free games a month think that MS announced at E3 is that a Xbox one thing or just a 360 thing until the launch of the xbox one?
The current program is pretty clear about it being for the 360 only, and only until the end of the year. No idea if the program will carry over to Xbox One, nor how it would look on that console.
They should launch the Xbox One by giving everyone who buys one every launch game for free pre-loaded on the console.
that might be just a tad extreme, but i'd be amazed if there wasn't a game preloaded on the console day one. the 360 had Hexic, the PS4 will have DriveClub(or a version of it at least), so its almost a given that there will be something available.
0
syndalisGetting ClassyOn the WallRegistered User, Loves Apple Productsregular
the two free games a month think that MS announced at E3 is that a Xbox one thing or just a 360 thing until the launch of the xbox one?
The current program is pretty clear about it being for the 360 only, and only until the end of the year. No idea if the program will carry over to Xbox One, nor how it would look on that console.
They should launch the Xbox One by giving everyone who buys one every launch game for free pre-loaded on the console.
I know you are kidding about all of them, but there are people who think there should be a bundled title... what game developers would be willing to shoulder that kind of loss?
Nintendo can pull it off because the launch games they bundle are usually glorified tech demos (admittedly, very fun ones).
And there isn't a unified "body" of xbox gamers. Some people just want a forza box. Some want a Battlefield box. Some want to build stuff with Project Spark. There isn't an "xbox experience" outside of, say, Halo... and even if that were a launch title it would be idiotic to bundle something that is going to move units anyways.
I mean, I would love a free game... but we are far more likely to get a couple free to play titles and some demos than we are a full fledged title at launch.
syndalis on
SW-4158-3990-6116
Let's play Mario Kart or something...
the two free games a month think that MS announced at E3 is that a Xbox one thing or just a 360 thing until the launch of the xbox one?
The current program is pretty clear about it being for the 360 only, and only until the end of the year. No idea if the program will carry over to Xbox One, nor how it would look on that console.
They should launch the Xbox One by giving everyone who buys one every launch game for free pre-loaded on the console.
that might be just a tad extreme, but i'd be amazed if there wasn't a game preloaded on the console day one. the 360 had Hexic, the PS4 will have DriveClub(or a version of it at least), so its almost a given that there will be something available.
Killer Instinct will be available for free. Well, a cut-down version of it anyway.
the two free games a month think that MS announced at E3 is that a Xbox one thing or just a 360 thing until the launch of the xbox one?
The current program is pretty clear about it being for the 360 only, and only until the end of the year. No idea if the program will carry over to Xbox One, nor how it would look on that console.
They should launch the Xbox One by giving everyone who buys one every launch game for free pre-loaded on the console.
... what game developers would be willing to shoulder that kind of loss?
Nintendo can pull it off because the launch games they bundle are usually glorified tech demos (admittedly, very fun ones).
And there isn't a unified "body" of xbox gamers. Some people just want a forza box. Some want a Battlefield box. Some want to build stuff with Project Spark. There isn't an "xbox experience" outside of, say, Halo... and even if that were a launch title it would be idiotic to bundle something that is going to move units anyways.
I mean, I would love a free game... but we are far more likely to get a couple free to play titles and some demos than we are a full fledged title at launch.
It would have to be a first party title, without a doubt. Halo would be the best option, but one won't be ready for launch.
the two free games a month think that MS announced at E3 is that a Xbox one thing or just a 360 thing until the launch of the xbox one?
The current program is pretty clear about it being for the 360 only, and only until the end of the year. No idea if the program will carry over to Xbox One, nor how it would look on that console.
They should launch the Xbox One by giving everyone who buys one every launch game for free pre-loaded on the console.
If you have PSN+ Sony are giving Drive Club and 3 of their indie titles for free on the launch of the PS4. I forget which games it is exactly. I would absolutely expect Microsoft of thinking of doing something similar given some of the changes they are making (dropping patch fees, making development easier and I suspect they will be announcing indie self publishing soon).
the two free games a month think that MS announced at E3 is that a Xbox one thing or just a 360 thing until the launch of the xbox one?
The current program is pretty clear about it being for the 360 only, and only until the end of the year. No idea if the program will carry over to Xbox One, nor how it would look on that console.
They should launch the Xbox One by giving everyone who buys one every launch game for free pre-loaded on the console.
that might be just a tad extreme, but i'd be amazed if there wasn't a game preloaded on the console day one. the 360 had Hexic, the PS4 will have DriveClub(or a version of it at least), so its almost a given that there will be something available.
Killer Instinct will be available for free. Well, a cut-down version of it anyway.
It's actually the full version. sort of.
It is the full game with all the stages and all the opponents, but you can only play as Jago. Totally to completion, and against any opponent online.
You can pay a one time fee to unlock all the characters, thus turning it into the full game. You can also pay a currently undisclosed amount of money to unlock one character.
So chances are if you see yourself wanting to play with all the characters (or host parties with the thing) your best bet is to buy the full version unlock... but if you only go online, you might get away with unlocking the 3-4 characters you like for under 20 bucks, and have the full game YOU want to play.
Its a great model for fighting games, and on that Namco is adopting with Tekken as well.
SW-4158-3990-6116
Let's play Mario Kart or something...
the two free games a month think that MS announced at E3 is that a Xbox one thing or just a 360 thing until the launch of the xbox one?
The current program is pretty clear about it being for the 360 only, and only until the end of the year. No idea if the program will carry over to Xbox One, nor how it would look on that console.
They should launch the Xbox One by giving everyone who buys one every launch game for free pre-loaded on the console.
that might be just a tad extreme, but i'd be amazed if there wasn't a game preloaded on the console day one. the 360 had Hexic, the PS4 will have DriveClub(or a version of it at least), so its almost a given that there will be something available.
Killer Instinct will be available for free. Well, a cut-down version of it anyway.
It's actually the full version. sort of.
It is the full game with all the stages and all the opponents, but you can only play as Jago. Totally to completion, and against any opponent online.
You can pay a one time fee to unlock all the characters, thus turning it into the full game. You can also pay a currently undisclosed amount of money to unlock one character.
So chances are if you see yourself wanting to play with all the characters (or host parties with the thing) your best bet is to buy the full version unlock... but if you only go online, you might get away with unlocking the 3-4 characters you like for under 20 bucks, and have the full game YOU want to play.
Its a great model for fighting games, and on that Namco is adopting with Tekken as well.
I knew about only having access to the one character, but I didn't know you could play through all of the stages. That's good news. I like this model actually. It gives me a chance to play through the game for free. Although, I can guarantee I will pick up a few characters to beat down on a friend of mine online.
the two free games a month think that MS announced at E3 is that a Xbox one thing or just a 360 thing until the launch of the xbox one?
The current program is pretty clear about it being for the 360 only, and only until the end of the year. No idea if the program will carry over to Xbox One, nor how it would look on that console.
They should launch the Xbox One by giving everyone who buys one every launch game for free pre-loaded on the console.
that might be just a tad extreme, but i'd be amazed if there wasn't a game preloaded on the console day one. the 360 had Hexic, the PS4 will have DriveClub(or a version of it at least), so its almost a given that there will be something available.
Killer Instinct will be available for free. Well, a cut-down version of it anyway.
It's actually the full version. sort of.
It is the full game with all the stages and all the opponents, but you can only play as Jago. Totally to completion, and against any opponent online.
You can pay a one time fee to unlock all the characters, thus turning it into the full game. You can also pay a currently undisclosed amount of money to unlock one character.
So chances are if you see yourself wanting to play with all the characters (or host parties with the thing) your best bet is to buy the full version unlock... but if you only go online, you might get away with unlocking the 3-4 characters you like for under 20 bucks, and have the full game YOU want to play.
Its a great model for fighting games, and on that Namco is adopting with Tekken as well.
You know what other fighting game used this model?
Posts
That's exactly the kind of problem I'm talking about, where I don't think there would be any actual hostility between Syndalis and yourself but because you've both had different experiences of the same thing, it feels like you're both trying to combat each other's information. You've had a terrible time with Azure, but he's confident that if it were entirely the fault of Azure, it would be much bigger news and you'd be getting all manner of reimbursement from them for the trouble, so he feels the need to hit back with a blanket "it's your IT staff being bad", which angers you, and round we go. He feels like you're exaggerating the problem because you're biased, you feel like he's downplaying your problem because he's biased. Really, everyone's just trying to get somewhere. Group hug.
Failed the Pepsi challenge then, is that it?
The "I TOLD YOU SO!" crowd is pretty fucking annoying, to put it bluntly. So is the "MAN, YOU ACTUALLY THOUGHT THAT?!" crowd. That's not everyone here, but after a while, all the arguments, complaints and general sarcasm become a blur and the points are lost along the way.
Here's what I think: the Xbox One is going to be another console that I will have a large selection of games to play on (that will also be available on the PS4), using a controller design that I vastly prefer over the competition's, with an online structure that not only has proven to be preferable to the competition's but probably, in all likelihood, will be improved upon. The controller design, online structure and exclusives (both announced and potential) are enough to persuade me to pay $100 more than Sony's offering. That doesn't even touch on the Kinect integration, media capabilities or cloud potential. Those things are bonuses to me.
Aside from the price, controller and exclusives, these systems are nearly identical. On paper the PS4 is more powerful. You know what my experience from the last generation tells me? That only matters for exclusive titles; nothing more. The differences between multi-platform titles was negligible from my perspective (unless you start talking about add-on content at which point the argument has moved on from "system power makes version X better/worse than version Y").
People seem to be getting personally offended by the extraneous details:
You're outside the US and won't benefit from the media integration? Microsoft is a western company whose primary audience for their console is the United States. You can still play games on it, so its core function still applies to you.
• You're paying $100 extra for useless media integration? No. You're paying for Kinect, plain and simple - OR - you don't have to buy it.
• You don't like/want Kinect? That's fine, you can turn it off - OR - you don't have to buy it.
• Your definition of "off" differs from Microsoft's? You're being a goose; you won't have to use it if you don't want to - OR - you don't have to buy it.
• You think Microsoft/the government is spying on you? I'm not in control of that, so I can't tell you you're wrong. What I can tell you is that you've now reached a point where the other console is going to be better for your peace of mind - AND - you don't have to buy it.
• You think Microsoft is selling to people based on meaningless buzzwords? I hate to break it to you, but so does basically every other company out there. You're smarter/more informed than the average gamer so feel free to shake your head, but try not to take it personally - AND - you don't have to buy it.
• You think that someone on the internet is wrong? Maybe they are; maybe they aren't. It's not worth flipping out over.
The point is that one console, the PS4, is primarily for people who just want to play games: no muss, no fuss. The Xbox One is for people who want something more. If you don't like what it offers, don't get mad at those of us that do. If you are mad because you want that something more and you feel left out because it won't apply to you? You're justified; I feel for you. Thing is, I don't think I've seen anyone actually make that argument yet.
TL;DR - Death of Rats was right: this isn't the console wars thread. If you can't make your point without doing so from an "I'm going to tear this fucker down" perspective, stop and ask yourself: do you really need to?
But in here... We're mortal enemies.
PSN ID: fearsomepirate
But you can see how that might feel like a kind of self-fulfilling prophecy? You worry it'll have poor support and nobody will buy it leading to it having poor support, so you adopt a negative tone to warn people of your fears it'll sell badly, and.. round it goes. I'm not asking for a ball of sunshine or to ignore the negatives, but when it feels like that's all anyone wants to talk about, it'll end up either driving away the other half of the discussion, or sending it down to the Console Wars trenches.
edit: again, obviously, this goes both ways too. A thread that's entirely about positives with all bad points being stamped out, will just feel like a PR orgy and won't help anyone know what they're really spending their money on. Needs both sides working to balance it.
Much like fine wines, each soda is good with a certain snack or food. Except Dr. Pepper, which is always horrible with anything.
Anyway, I don't even understand why "winning" or "losing" a product war is even relevant in an adult's life. You buy one platform, you play its games, you have fun. Does it really matter if the console is a failure? You buy one console, you do not have fun (or it fails because it's no longer supported), buy another platform; problem solved. It just seems like an arbitrary limitation...
The other thing is the presentation of the negative opinions that incites arguments instead of simply stating opinion:
"I don't like how Microsoft presented and handled this policy. They should have done this." vs... "This is just another example of the gross incompetence of Microsoft's executives, the final straw in a long string of missteps and errors and they should have known that instead of doing it this way doing it that way... and such" and it's just wtf.
I don't think there is any change the Xbox One thuds in the marketplace. The early Call of Duty content alone will prevent that.
So let the companies have their fight. Nobody got hurt by deciding not to give a toss if an Xbox sold more or less than a Playstation. If you want to discuss financials, there's an Industry thread for doing exactly that, but all the 'Console Wars' gets here is heated arguments and pointless divisions drawn between people just trying to discuss the pros and cons of details we won't be certain about for another 5/6 months. It causes a petty, childish, tribal attitude that doesn't progress anything.
http://www.polygon.com/2013/6/28/4473020/microsoft-working-on-third-party-and-current-gen-peripheral-support
This is good news. More interesting though is the game audio coming out of the new controller port. This has been mentioned, but I would love to be able to have a headset play game audio and chat audio without having to be tethered to me TV and console. This is great.
No, it's definitely a mentality. Microsoft isn't at war with sony isn't at war with google isn't at war with apple. They put out competing products sometime. More often than not, however, they work together. They make deals. They are members of an industry. Microsoft will "go to war with apple" in the public mindset, then turn around and make 10 backroom deals to get their software on apple products. It's not Sony vs Microsoft. It's consumers vs business.
It's like, ok, the NBA, right? Those teams compete against each other, right? But no NBA team wants to see another NBA team completely crash and burn, because it hurts their business as a whole. They're a union of competing entities. It's not war.
I agree that some people take it the wrong way. I look at the console wars as a positive note. It means the companies are fighting for my dollar, and that gets me better value for what I buy. At the end of the day all I want to do is play cool games, the platform the game is on usually doesn't interest me all that much.
Also I spoke about this exact issue recently, but like, with spoken words and a camera.
This means that I can hook a headset up to my controller, leave the sound bar off in my living room, and play mah halo at 3am with the volume turned up to 11 without pissing off neighbors.
This will probably make me invest in a very expensive headset this gen that is completely proprietary (oh noes), because my television, blu rays, streaming content, and everything else will pipe through that headset just fine, with the added benefit of live voice chat.
That said, you know if Microsoft doesn't do it, some enterprising 3rd party developer will make the "puck" bit with a standard minijack for the xbox 360 headsets.
The only 360 peripheral support I feel microsoft needs to care about are the ones that are almost pure HID - stuff like arcade sticks that were mentioned earlier by Inquisitor. Regular controllers and whatnot are lacking some core features I want the developers to focus on (like the new rumble tech) and I would rather they just not be an option, especially since there is no backwards compatibility with software.
Let's play Mario Kart or something...
It depends on why Sony would be crashing and burning. If Sony's crash and burn directly correlates into microsoft sales, sure. Like for every playstation NOT sold, it would be an Xbox sold, then of course they'll take that. But it's rarely that cut and dry. They'd much rather maintain the status quo than really shake up the industry.
It'd be more like if a new, non-gaming interactive medium sprang up that was in competition to microsoft and sony's model. Like say gaming suddenly starts dropping off dramatically in favor of holodeck plays, a field neither microsoft nor sony have stake in. Microsoft, in that case, sure as shit doesn't want Sony to crash and burn. They want their industry to stay supported.
EDIT: Going back to the NBA analogy - teams may want to win over the other team, but the heat don't want the bulls organization to crumble because people are watching football, because that hurts their bottom line as well. Thus, you'll never see Microsoft coming out and slamming Sony's JRPGs as boring or whatever, because they're selling the same product.
EDIT AGAIN: Or, to provide a better counter-example: you want to see war? War is what the NRA is waging on video games. Where they have no bottom line to maintain.
I have a $30 Turtlebeach headset that is just awesome. I frequently play later on at night when my wife and kids are sleeping and being able to turn down the volume of the TV and have everything come through the headset is excellent. However, I would buy a new headset in a second (depending on price of course) if I could connect it directly to the controller.
At the same time, some arguments aren't "console wars." I've said over and over again that nothing I'm saying in this thread stems from some sort of schadenfreude against microsoft. Some people in this thread have vested interests in this medium. There's a difference between someone campaigning for one artist over another because he is emotionally invested in that artist, and someone campaigning for one artist over another because that artist represents a growing trend within the medium. It's possible to actually worry about the health of the medium, and to care about the medium itself.
Now, granted, that's just opinion. There is no intrinsically honest or true opinion about what the medium should or shouldn't be. Someone can legitimately disagree that one trend is dangerous.
If this means the USB fighting stick I have for the 360 works, then two thumbs up for me.
I dunno, when you have been a supporter of a certain console for a long time in buying software, subscriptions and DLC on their platform, then they make numerous disagreeable decisions it is more than worth commentary. Especially when it's the case one company donates most of their entire reveal to features that won't work in your country at launch and won't for a nebulous period afterwards. Or the numerous other entirely valid concerns that if properly addressed, especially after MS did the right thing on other areas, would go a long way to making the console an actually attractive option again. I feel when certain people then go declaring these issues "Petty", when they are actually still important issues to many I would sincerely question who is actually lowering the level of discussion in this thread. Or alternatively when all the actual contribution amounts to sarcastic comments like saying NZ makes "Sour grapes". No, being treated by a company you've supported for years like you're an irrelevant customer, that is what makes "Sour grapes".
I have certainly called out people on "my side" several times and just as vigorously as anyone else I think is making a silly argument (EG the xbone games running on PCs e3 pictures non-issue) as well.
first and sixteenth of every month
http://www.xbox.com/en-US/live/games-with-gold
Completely agree, and I guess my point is that it's for everyone to police themselves as best as they can, to consider what they're saying and how. I know I've had to delete a few posts because I've felt a need to say something snarky back about someone, and I've probably let some stuff through the filter that hasn't helped. And likewise, if I can trust that I'm doing my best to be fair and accepting, then I can hope that others are doing the same thing and.
And honestly, I am not trying to rain on anyone's parade. Period.
I just get mad (sometimes irrationally so, admittedly) at people who not only take an opposing point of view, but ramp up the hyperbole just a wee bit more than is necessary. If there weren't phrases like "Syndalis says the internet runs on rainbows and unicorn farts," in response to me being excited about dedicated servers that do more than just host matches for the XBO, especially considering my line of work deals with the ups and downs of maintaining services over the internet, I would probably not be as snarky as I have gotten.
Either way, I pretty much drew a line in the sand and won't be responding to any posts like that, even if they are quoting me out of turn or doing nonsense like what I quoted above, because I don't want to drag the discourse down here any more than it already has been.
And I am not trying to trash your team, urahonky. I know what I said was impolite, and I apologize. And I don't doubt you are having a problem, but everything I know about these services leads me to believe that the problem probably exists in some place not azure proper. Especially if it is happening at the times you specify. Too many large organizations moving many billions of dollars a year through that infrastructure to allow for it to be that spotty. Xbox live, which is already running in Azure, would not enjoy the kind of reliability people praise it for. Skype would be a hot mess if it intermittently dropped calls every 5 minutes.
So big money really is on either somewhere between your locale and Azure is having issues, or a timed system event/CRON process gone amok.
Let's play Mario Kart or something...
The hypocrisy here is wonderful, considering my response is to a post where you are basically upset that people internationally may have problems with azure servers that make them a less than idea solution. If you didn't write such disdain for the opinions of others with different connection issues, maybe I wouldn't have wrote that but do go on pretending you are not part of the problem with the way you cherry pick PR statements that suit your arguments and wilfully ignore every point made to you.
Has there been any word on whether Assassin's Creed 2 or Halo 3 is the next free game?
Let's play Mario Kart or something...
They should launch the Xbox One by giving everyone who buys one every launch game for free pre-loaded on the console.
What's on that page is everything I know about the program
That's stupid!
that might be just a tad extreme, but i'd be amazed if there wasn't a game preloaded on the console day one. the 360 had Hexic, the PS4 will have DriveClub(or a version of it at least), so its almost a given that there will be something available.
I know you are kidding about all of them, but there are people who think there should be a bundled title... what game developers would be willing to shoulder that kind of loss?
Nintendo can pull it off because the launch games they bundle are usually glorified tech demos (admittedly, very fun ones).
And there isn't a unified "body" of xbox gamers. Some people just want a forza box. Some want a Battlefield box. Some want to build stuff with Project Spark. There isn't an "xbox experience" outside of, say, Halo... and even if that were a launch title it would be idiotic to bundle something that is going to move units anyways.
I mean, I would love a free game... but we are far more likely to get a couple free to play titles and some demos than we are a full fledged title at launch.
Let's play Mario Kart or something...
Killer Instinct will be available for free. Well, a cut-down version of it anyway.
It would have to be a first party title, without a doubt. Halo would be the best option, but one won't be ready for launch.
If you have PSN+ Sony are giving Drive Club and 3 of their indie titles for free on the launch of the PS4. I forget which games it is exactly. I would absolutely expect Microsoft of thinking of doing something similar given some of the changes they are making (dropping patch fees, making development easier and I suspect they will be announcing indie self publishing soon).
It's actually the full version. sort of.
It is the full game with all the stages and all the opponents, but you can only play as Jago. Totally to completion, and against any opponent online.
You can pay a one time fee to unlock all the characters, thus turning it into the full game. You can also pay a currently undisclosed amount of money to unlock one character.
So chances are if you see yourself wanting to play with all the characters (or host parties with the thing) your best bet is to buy the full version unlock... but if you only go online, you might get away with unlocking the 3-4 characters you like for under 20 bucks, and have the full game YOU want to play.
Its a great model for fighting games, and on that Namco is adopting with Tekken as well.
Let's play Mario Kart or something...
I knew about only having access to the one character, but I didn't know you could play through all of the stages. That's good news. I like this model actually. It gives me a chance to play through the game for free. Although, I can guarantee I will pick up a few characters to beat down on a friend of mine online.
You know what other fighting game used this model?