M making this thread just for a friendly discussion of who prefers what, why. Posts can be for either topic, for both, and can be be about most anything. I want to stress friendly, as in if there is Slander tossed, or insults used, and it gets out of hand I will close the thread(delete it if I can, I'd not I'll pm a mod). I just want to see what most people prefer. If there is already a thread for this, just close it or pm me.
Xbox vs. Playstation , console gaming vs. computer gaming
JamesP2097
121 - 140 of 171 Posts
Joined
·
8,516 Posts
Here you go... I'm not sure what the people at MS were thinking when they made this rule...
http://www.escapistmagazine.com/news/view/125057-DayZ-Coming-to-PS4-Ditching-Xbox-One
Joined
·
974 Posts
Delivered
http://www.vg247.com/2013/06/14/dayz-more-likely-on-ps4-than-xbox-one/
http://www.escapistmagazine.com/news/view/125057-DayZ-Coming-to-PS4-Ditching-Xbox-One
http://www.edge-online.com/news/dayz-set-to-arrive-on-ps4-but-could-skip-xbox-one/
http://n4g.com/news/1282263/dayz-se...dayz-set-to-arrive-on-ps4-but-could-skip-xbox-one-due-to-microsoft-restrictions
Also these were the Xbox ones everyone saw at E3.
Attachments
Joined
·
307 Posts
I've been a Xbox supporter since the original! , but this year they will not get my hard earned money! I've been video gaming since the 80's and watching micro$hiz come out like that and treating gamers like crap and not listing to us was a slap to the face. NO thank you Xboner I'm done with Halo ( halo 4 boring ) bungie left and so did a creat game. The rest of the games Xbox is putting up is just a B rated games now! COD, AC, etc... All the same year in and year out.and don't get me started on the " watchful eye " lol here's a quote in response to Cliffy B on used game sales :
"Production costs are skyrocketing yet at the same time game quality is going down. Unless you are into multiplayer very few games are worth the $60 price tag anymore. The campaign of your average FPS is 5-6 hours long and usually ships with enough bugs to require a day one patch.
Cliffy B wants to use AC IV as an example, well fine Cliff, maybe AC IV would not need thousands of developers if Ubisoft didn't insist on shipping a new AC game every November. Serialization and marketing are what is driving up costs not used games or game rentals. You see Cliff, you are making a huge mistake when you assume that if you remove used games and rentals from the market that it means people will simply have to buy more games at full price. Not true, games are not food and shelter, they are not NEEDS. If you take the ability to buy used or rent games off the table then you simply force the consumer to make even more choice in what they spend their gaming dollars on while at the same time publishers are no longer gettng thousands of sales from Blockbuster, Redbox, and Gamefly.
By the way maybe if guys like you were less graphics/technology whores and actually paid more attention to game quality, fun, and longevity you would get more sales. I know I personally would be more likely to pay $60 for a fun game that has decent length and slightly subpar graphics than pay $60 for a gorgeous game that provides 8 hours before its done. This is why you never read about Rockstar or Bethesda studios whining about used games. GTA, Elder Scrolls, Fallout are all examples of games that are not cutting edge graphically, but provide long engaging gameplay."
"Production costs are skyrocketing yet at the same time game quality is going down. Unless you are into multiplayer very few games are worth the $60 price tag anymore. The campaign of your average FPS is 5-6 hours long and usually ships with enough bugs to require a day one patch.
Cliffy B wants to use AC IV as an example, well fine Cliff, maybe AC IV would not need thousands of developers if Ubisoft didn't insist on shipping a new AC game every November. Serialization and marketing are what is driving up costs not used games or game rentals. You see Cliff, you are making a huge mistake when you assume that if you remove used games and rentals from the market that it means people will simply have to buy more games at full price. Not true, games are not food and shelter, they are not NEEDS. If you take the ability to buy used or rent games off the table then you simply force the consumer to make even more choice in what they spend their gaming dollars on while at the same time publishers are no longer gettng thousands of sales from Blockbuster, Redbox, and Gamefly.
By the way maybe if guys like you were less graphics/technology whores and actually paid more attention to game quality, fun, and longevity you would get more sales. I know I personally would be more likely to pay $60 for a fun game that has decent length and slightly subpar graphics than pay $60 for a gorgeous game that provides 8 hours before its done. This is why you never read about Rockstar or Bethesda studios whining about used games. GTA, Elder Scrolls, Fallout are all examples of games that are not cutting edge graphically, but provide long engaging gameplay."
Joined
·
1,739 Posts
Joined
·
5,992 Posts
I still don't want one. Just the fact that they thought they could get away with that and not have people up in arms about it is ridiculous.
Joined
·
1,739 Posts
They were just trying something different. It wasn't thought through very well, but I don't think you should hate them for it. And they're trying to fix it, that's huge in my book. They're spending hundreds of hours reforming software and hardware to fix it, to make you guys happy.Thatguyoverthere1111 said:
Joined
·
5,992 Posts
If it still comes with Kinect I don't want it. If its sill $100 more, I don't want it. I don't care what they're fixing, they shouldn't have to fix that many policies. They're making this thing FOR the consumer, and those policies were a big middle finger in our faces. So we give one back. now they're all "Oh sorry, we'll fix it." Who made the Xbox 360 the most popular console? The consumers. We pay for their salaries, and they repay us by walking all over us. That philosophy doesn't fly in my book.RayRules67 said:
Joined
·
1,739 Posts
If your mom makes you the wrong sandwich, do you hate her? The sandwich she makes is huge and awesome, but you don't like pickles or mayo. When you tell her, she fixes it, but it still has a few little quirks that wouldn't be there if you made it yourself. Do you still hate her after she apologizes and makes you something else that you'll like better?Thatguyoverthere1111 said:
That is like Microsoft and the Xbox One, they made a mistake, and now they're fixing it, so stop hating them. They add a kinect so you can have a better experience. And if they ask $100 extra, who cares? They'll deliver an awesome entertainment console, and that's worth the extra cash.
Joined
·
5,992 Posts
Is it really? The only games I'm interested in are miltiplatform, and the PS4 will do those games just as well. I have a wii, and that type of gameplay is not for me, and the Kinect is very similar. $100 extra matters when you have to buy the console yourself, and you're not exactly rolling in dough. And it may be monetarily worth the extra $100, but for my playing experience, it's not.RayRules67 said:
Joined
·
2,170 Posts
I agree with what you're saying apart from the Kinect part. I don't want the Kinect because I'll never use it. It isn't worth the extra $100 IMO. But that doesn't mean I won't get the Xbox One. I am not going to hold a grude against MS like some people. I accept them fixing it and am happy about it.RayRules67 said:
Joined
·
1,342 Posts
I have played the original Xbox and Xbxo 360, but neither have anything to deviate myself from the Playstation consoles. I grew up playing the original playstation when it came out in 1998. Xbox may offer better multiplayer, but there's no purpose for me to play multiplayer (unless it's LAN) on the consoles when I have my PC. The Xbox exclusive titles have failed to garner my attraction to the console as well. The only reasons I continue to get a PS4 is a few several reasons:
1. It's Playstation.
2. To add to my collection of different generation of Playstation.
3. I don't need multiplayer, I play on console for the sake of playing singleplayer games.
4. I have had awful experience with Microsoft products and tech support in the past. Working in the Information Technology field, I've developed a grudge against them for their awful products.
5. I'm used to the Playstation comfortable controllers.
6. Sony has earned my customer trust with its reliable consoles, whereas stories of failure from Microsoft still plague me. I've had good customer satisfaction with Sony and their tech support, not with just their Playstation, but the rest of their products that I've owned.
7. Cheaper than Xbox One
8. Least important, but I've always like the design of the Playstation console and the user interface.
I'd still vouch for PC anyways. Both consoles lack the modability, which is the biggest factor to my decision to buying a game. I don't want DLC. I don't care if graphics are lacking, I don't care which one are hyped and which one are underrated. What truly determine is how much I can mod the game to make it more fun, more interactive, more tuned to my gaming style and desires.
1. It's Playstation.
2. To add to my collection of different generation of Playstation.
3. I don't need multiplayer, I play on console for the sake of playing singleplayer games.
4. I have had awful experience with Microsoft products and tech support in the past. Working in the Information Technology field, I've developed a grudge against them for their awful products.
5. I'm used to the Playstation comfortable controllers.
6. Sony has earned my customer trust with its reliable consoles, whereas stories of failure from Microsoft still plague me. I've had good customer satisfaction with Sony and their tech support, not with just their Playstation, but the rest of their products that I've owned.
7. Cheaper than Xbox One
8. Least important, but I've always like the design of the Playstation console and the user interface.
I'd still vouch for PC anyways. Both consoles lack the modability, which is the biggest factor to my decision to buying a game. I don't want DLC. I don't care if graphics are lacking, I don't care which one are hyped and which one are underrated. What truly determine is how much I can mod the game to make it more fun, more interactive, more tuned to my gaming style and desires.
If you really think that they are doing this to make us happy, you are very mistaken. They made those changes because they realized that they would lose money if they didn't. They care about money, not the players.
Joined
·
1,739 Posts
But if the players aren't happy they don't get money. Checkmate.jkjkjk182 said:
Joined
·
10,712 Posts
Comparing console gaming to PC gaming is kind of a non-starter, yet people always do it for whatever reason.
It's like comparing a stock KWA with a Polarstar or PTW or something. While yes a comparison can be drawn, i's just not an even remotely fair one.
------
If you wonder how I drew this conclusion, I'll break it down for you:
The KWA (read as consoles) is new. Designed to be affordable to the masses in order to sell well. It's based on a pretty standard design theory. The design concept works, but there are often issues with actual implementation (parts failures etc). Due to proprietary design customization is difficult. You're pretty much limited to factory parts, bar a few options from other companies.
The lollerstar/ptw/whatever (read PC) is a vastly more refined platform. Based on the original concept but has gone through years of trial & error, testing, development etc. Is now a much more advanced platform. Has a lot of room for customization & upgrades. Huge support base, wide variety of options.
Do they both throw bbs (play games) yes. Will one do it significantly better than the other with a lot more user options? Absolutely, there's no question about it.
You really just have to decide whether or not that's what you want. I would say if you take gaming at all seriously the natural progression is to upgrade to PC at some point or another. If you are just an occasional casual player then you'll probably be quite content breaking out the old stock gun (console) & having a game once in a while, but for many that will simply not suffice.
Now to get away from my little analogy thing. The main issues with consoles, there is really no good options in terms of user settings or peripherals. You can't ensure games run above 60 FPS at all times* , you can't adjust control settings properly at all** , you can't adjust game engine settings to make it run optimally for the way you play*** , the list goes on and on.
* Don't forget FPS effects controller INPUT as well. If anyone ever tells you that 'hurr durr you cant notice over 24 fps anyway' they are a moron and disregard everything they say from then on. If your frame rate drops bellow around 60 your gameplay WILL suffer, I guarantee it. Ideally you want to maintain above 120 FPS at all times. That is simply not possible on a console, most 360 games hover around the 30-40 FPS mark and drop down to as low as the 20s in graphics heavy situations. Unnaceptable, it's like trying to swim fully clothed through a pool full of custard.
** While you can adjust things like 'which button does what' and 'joystick sensitivity'. That's about it. You can't adjust polling rate, cursor acceleration, nothing like that. With the way cursor movement works (its a multiplication of the 'sensitivity' setting by whatever sensitivity the controller out puts at) So it's no wonder that console aim is so inaccurate! On my PC I have my mouse & computer set up to run the perfect sensitivity for my play without a sensitivity multiplier on top of my mouses DPI. A good test to demonstrate this is open paint, pick the brush or pen tool & try draw perfect circles. Chances are you will see jagged lines, straight edges etc, this is bad. If properly set up the line will come out smooth with no jaggies at all.
*** I suspect most of you will be unfamiliar with this. But basically every game engine has settings which determine how it runs, how it interpolates & extrapolates player positions etc over the network (as it is never 100% accurate it has to 'guess' based on last known data). So say you are playing on a 100 ping server, you would optimise the engine to run with a 100ms delay. Or if you are at a LAN event you would set it up to run with a 0 to 5ms delay. This means things like player character models will render much closer to where the player actually is, allowing you to hit shots more consistently etc. In the competitive community EVERYONE tweaks the hell out of their games like this as it really helps give you the edge.
It's like comparing a stock KWA with a Polarstar or PTW or something. While yes a comparison can be drawn, i's just not an even remotely fair one.
------
If you wonder how I drew this conclusion, I'll break it down for you:
The KWA (read as consoles) is new. Designed to be affordable to the masses in order to sell well. It's based on a pretty standard design theory. The design concept works, but there are often issues with actual implementation (parts failures etc). Due to proprietary design customization is difficult. You're pretty much limited to factory parts, bar a few options from other companies.
The lollerstar/ptw/whatever (read PC) is a vastly more refined platform. Based on the original concept but has gone through years of trial & error, testing, development etc. Is now a much more advanced platform. Has a lot of room for customization & upgrades. Huge support base, wide variety of options.
Do they both throw bbs (play games) yes. Will one do it significantly better than the other with a lot more user options? Absolutely, there's no question about it.
You really just have to decide whether or not that's what you want. I would say if you take gaming at all seriously the natural progression is to upgrade to PC at some point or another. If you are just an occasional casual player then you'll probably be quite content breaking out the old stock gun (console) & having a game once in a while, but for many that will simply not suffice.
Now to get away from my little analogy thing. The main issues with consoles, there is really no good options in terms of user settings or peripherals. You can't ensure games run above 60 FPS at all times* , you can't adjust control settings properly at all** , you can't adjust game engine settings to make it run optimally for the way you play*** , the list goes on and on.
* Don't forget FPS effects controller INPUT as well. If anyone ever tells you that 'hurr durr you cant notice over 24 fps anyway' they are a moron and disregard everything they say from then on. If your frame rate drops bellow around 60 your gameplay WILL suffer, I guarantee it. Ideally you want to maintain above 120 FPS at all times. That is simply not possible on a console, most 360 games hover around the 30-40 FPS mark and drop down to as low as the 20s in graphics heavy situations. Unnaceptable, it's like trying to swim fully clothed through a pool full of custard.
** While you can adjust things like 'which button does what' and 'joystick sensitivity'. That's about it. You can't adjust polling rate, cursor acceleration, nothing like that. With the way cursor movement works (its a multiplication of the 'sensitivity' setting by whatever sensitivity the controller out puts at) So it's no wonder that console aim is so inaccurate! On my PC I have my mouse & computer set up to run the perfect sensitivity for my play without a sensitivity multiplier on top of my mouses DPI. A good test to demonstrate this is open paint, pick the brush or pen tool & try draw perfect circles. Chances are you will see jagged lines, straight edges etc, this is bad. If properly set up the line will come out smooth with no jaggies at all.
*** I suspect most of you will be unfamiliar with this. But basically every game engine has settings which determine how it runs, how it interpolates & extrapolates player positions etc over the network (as it is never 100% accurate it has to 'guess' based on last known data). So say you are playing on a 100 ping server, you would optimise the engine to run with a 100ms delay. Or if you are at a LAN event you would set it up to run with a 0 to 5ms delay. This means things like player character models will render much closer to where the player actually is, allowing you to hit shots more consistently etc. In the competitive community EVERYONE tweaks the hell out of their games like this as it really helps give you the edge.
Joined
·
94 Posts
Well I'm sticking with Xbox again, the fact that they tried to change to system from what it used to be is a big plus to me. Although all the negative aspects to it were there (http://news.xbox.com/2013/06/update) it all got fixed. It great they tried to mix it up. Did Sony show any signs of improvement at all? No. It is the exact same system as the Ps3 but with better graphics. Now xbox one will be the same as the 360 because people hound on the system 6 months before it comes out. People need to learn to step out of their comfort zone and try new things.1
Joined
·
2,170 Posts
But it wasn't a plus for me all the **** they originally had planned for the Xbox One. "Just changing it up" in my mind isn't requiring internet access 24/7 or restrictin my game trade. To me, that was all a bunch of BS. And Microsoft didn't change all that up to be different, it was to maximize profit which turned against them by losing tons of pre-orders.AtlasContracts said:
Joined
·
1,747 Posts
Just saying, it's at ~24 FPS that the eye no more can distinguish movement from still objects. A stable 24 FPS with some PP would probably look pretty similar to a game running at 120 FPS.
I favor consoles because you get more performance per dollar and you're assured that you can play the future games without having to buy upgrades for hundreds of dollars.
121 - 140 of 171 Posts
-
?
-
?
-
?
-
?
-
?
-
?
-
?
-
?
-
?
-
?
-
?
-
?
-
?
-
?
-
?
-
?
-
?
-
?
-
?
-
?
