I love these threads... good info mixed in with absolute shite, with a few fanboyisms sprinkled on top.
Sent using Tapatalk.
Sent using Tapatalk.
Gaming PS4 vs Xbox One - The suckiest thread in the history of suckyness
- Thread starter vuc
- Start date
It will certainly be integral if you want to make the best use of the console. Imagine playing Skyrim without any d-pad hotkeys for changing weapons/spells - imagine the PS2 without R/L1 & R/L2. What you're imagining now is akin to the step backwards people will imagine when they try to remember what console gaming was like before Xbox One.
Being able to talk to and gesture towards your console will be an integral aspect of future gaming. You might be able to turn the Kinect off, but you will not wish to do so.
Smart Glass was and is innovative - admittedly they brought it out for Xbox 360 first, but it's a gradual process and it's going to be very much a big thing on the Xbox One. The PS4 jumped on, and are promising to be able to offer similar features - like they are now promising party chat, and copied off the Xbox's achievements. Yes, the Kinect was a better version of the Eye Toy - MS have taken ideas from Sony, but let's not pretend that Sony only incorporate their own ideas.
The controller has rumble-features built in within the triggers - we've never seen this before, and those who have got their hands on the controller love it - not just the concept but the execution, saying that it really adds to the feel of a game.
The Kinect 2 is innovative - it has it's own processor and as such is able to pick incredibly small movements (also your heartbeat, your weight distribution and muscle tension) with no noticeable latency lag. It is able to define a profile by the appropriate individual rather than the controller they are holding - swap a controller mid-game and it'll swap the profile to the new controller.
The ability to be able to 'snap' apps and play games while also on Skype or watching TV is also new to the console sphere. It can multi-task in ways the PS4 has not (yet?) shown and neither did the previous gen - you can have multiple things running on the same screen, you could play a Xbox One game and swap to an Xbox 360 game in a matter of seconds if you had the Xbox 360 passing through the HDMI into the console. The ability to watch TV through the console, or to play a previous console while still using the Xbox One UI is definitely innovative.
The ability to watch a sports match, and have your Xbox One add information in a 'Smart TV' type way is definitely cool - you will be able to have your fantasy teams linked to the Xbox One in certain regions and certain sports. That's innovative.
The cloud - we've been over this multiple times in the thread, and as much as you (Weaste) have often discarded it as useless, you have also admitted that there are potential possibilities for it, but if they happen then the PS4 will simply do the same. We know that it can work for computing, due to Nvidia's light test - it may not be particularly practical or impressive right now, but it's a good safeguard for the future and they are pushing with it. A number of developers have spoken about it's ability, developers who aren't just exclusive to MS (even if their game might be) - see Insomniac, Respawn, Turn 10 and Avalanche.
Potential innovation comes in the form of recently filed patent for Augmented Reality Gaming glasses, and also the Illumiroom.
--
Anyway, Ciderman agrees with me, and he likes 90210 so he obviously has superior taste to you noobs.
The controller has rumble-features built in within the triggers - we've never seen this before, and those who have got their hands on the controller love it - not just the concept but the execution, saying that it really adds to the feel of a game.
The Kinect 2 is innovative - it has it's own processor and as such is able to pick incredibly small movements (also your heartbeat, your weight distribution and muscle tension) with no noticeable latency lag. It is able to define a profile by the appropriate individual rather than the controller they are holding - swap a controller mid-game and it'll swap the profile to the new controller.
The ability to be able to 'snap' apps and play games while also on Skype or watching TV is also new to the console sphere. It can multi-task in ways the PS4 has not (yet?) shown and neither did the previous gen - you can have multiple things running on the same screen, you could play a Xbox One game and swap to an Xbox 360 game in a matter of seconds if you had the Xbox 360 passing through the HDMI into the console. The ability to watch TV through the console, or to play a previous console while still using the Xbox One UI is definitely innovative.
The ability to watch a sports match, and have your Xbox One add information in a 'Smart TV' type way is definitely cool - you will be able to have your fantasy teams linked to the Xbox One in certain regions and certain sports. That's innovative.
The cloud - we've been over this multiple times in the thread, and as much as you (Weaste) have often discarded it as useless, you have also admitted that there are potential possibilities for it, but if they happen then the PS4 will simply do the same. We know that it can work for computing, due to Nvidia's light test - it may not be particularly practical or impressive right now, but it's a good safeguard for the future and they are pushing with it. A number of developers have spoken about it's ability, developers who aren't just exclusive to MS (even if their game might be) - see Insomniac, Respawn, Turn 10 and Avalanche.
Potential innovation comes in the form of recently filed patent for Augmented Reality Gaming glasses, and also the Illumiroom.
--
Anyway, Ciderman agrees with me, and he likes 90210 so he obviously has superior taste to you noobs.
I feel that many of the 'innovations' MS announced were not so much innovations, but rather solutions to non-existant problems.
Things like the scenario where you're playing a game and someone wants to skype with you. MS now have a solution to this...but how many people's lives is this really going to make better/improve? If I want to quickly chat/skype with someone, then I will use my mobile to do it. If I wanted to skype on my laptop with someone for a longer chat, then would prefer if they weren't constantly switching back and forth to the game they were playing.
You even said above - The ability to be able to 'snap' apps and play games while also on Skype or watching TV is also new to the console sphere. It is new, but that it not the same as saying it is needed. I usually decide between playing a game and watching a movie. I am yet to be mid-way through a movie and think "wouldn't it be cool if I could play 15 mins of COD and then return to the movie instantly?". Also, am pretty sure you could watch TV through the PS3 anyway - I don't know this for sure because although they launched something like this in the UK, it was not available in the Netherlands. Kinda like many of the smart tv sports info they announced. Great if you like the NFL (which I do), but not so great if you do not live in the US (which I do not).
Likewise swapping controllers mid-game and the console automatically reassigning profiles. Maybe this does add convenience for the people who constantly switch controllers...but again, how many people are we talking about here?
As I said already, I think it could be interesting to see how Kinect is leveraged in the future. But the fact that what they promoted was how you can say 'Xbox on' to turn on your console...and say that is one of the things that can make gaming better, is ridiculous in the extreme.
Things like the scenario where you're playing a game and someone wants to skype with you. MS now have a solution to this...but how many people's lives is this really going to make better/improve? If I want to quickly chat/skype with someone, then I will use my mobile to do it. If I wanted to skype on my laptop with someone for a longer chat, then would prefer if they weren't constantly switching back and forth to the game they were playing.
You even said above - The ability to be able to 'snap' apps and play games while also on Skype or watching TV is also new to the console sphere. It is new, but that it not the same as saying it is needed. I usually decide between playing a game and watching a movie. I am yet to be mid-way through a movie and think "wouldn't it be cool if I could play 15 mins of COD and then return to the movie instantly?". Also, am pretty sure you could watch TV through the PS3 anyway - I don't know this for sure because although they launched something like this in the UK, it was not available in the Netherlands. Kinda like many of the smart tv sports info they announced. Great if you like the NFL (which I do), but not so great if you do not live in the US (which I do not).
Likewise swapping controllers mid-game and the console automatically reassigning profiles. Maybe this does add convenience for the people who constantly switch controllers...but again, how many people are we talking about here?
As I said already, I think it could be interesting to see how Kinect is leveraged in the future. But the fact that what they promoted was how you can say 'Xbox on' to turn on your console...and say that is one of the things that can make gaming better, is ridiculous in the extreme.
MS can't even agree on what console gaming will be like WITH the Xbox One.
Maybe they should figure how what that looks like, and how many U-turns it will take for them to get there, before we start claiming that the Xbox is redefining console gaming.
So, Alock, are you more of an Xbox or Playstation fan?
I think all this thread was missing was a message sent via Tapatalk.
I'd say he's firmly on the fence...
Wether or not there's a charge for preowned games, the console has to be always online or the Kinect always on has no bearing on the potential of the Kinect technology to revolutionise in-game interactions.
These are minor quibbles which MS are addressing prior to launch in response to consumer pressure. The functionality of Kinect will remain the same (unless you stubbornly switch it off; something which will likely soon be akin to switching off your controller mid-game) whether you paid a small charge for a preowned game or not.
Lol.. I know both of you are being sarcastic, but I am.
Like I said, I haven't pre-ordered either and I want both of them.
I have both an Xbox 360 and PS3 - though the PS3 isn't in my room, so naturally I've played it less, but I've also always prefered the 360 anyway (the controller, the live experience - party chat, until recently the exclusives). I've still got my PS1 and PS2 and I love my VITA, even though Sony have dissapointed me with their lack of support for it since it's release and also there is promises (remote play) and plenty of potential yet to be fulfilled.
Personally I think you'd be mad to pay full price for the PS4, and insane for the XB1.
There's no doubt I'll end up owning both (all three with the Wii-U) I always do, but this is easily the lamest and most backwards new generation of consoles ever. And I thought the PS3/XB360 generation was pretty weak at launch.
Then again I won't use share buttons, nor am I interested in kinect. On the games front I know of a few gems not announced yet, but it's quite depressingly shallow the first few years. Hopefully it picks up, but with all the focus on short and cheap at the moment it could take a while.
There's no doubt I'll end up owning both (all three with the Wii-U) I always do, but this is easily the lamest and most backwards new generation of consoles ever. And I thought the PS3/XB360 generation was pretty weak at launch.
Then again I won't use share buttons, nor am I interested in kinect. On the games front I know of a few gems not announced yet, but it's quite depressingly shallow the first few years. Hopefully it picks up, but with all the focus on short and cheap at the moment it could take a while.
Let's start with this point.
What is this doing?
Not many people own one if those.
What was it that the founder of id Software said about the new Kinect? That it was like a 'zero button mouse, with lots of latency', but I'm sure IGN are more reliable with these things.
Yeah, just 5 million of us, we're in the minority always getting abused. Anyway, point is, God of War there is not running on the VITA, it's running on the PS3, it's perfectly playable for the most part.
I know what you mean by that - the PS3 was for me the jump to HD gaming...and bought a new HD tv to go with it. Also there was Blu-ray etc, so it was a big step up from PS2 levels.
I think this gen is always going to struggle in comparison, but still think there will be big advances made this gen.
Have seen you saying this for a lot of time but still don't understand.
How do you mean they have gone backwards? The new consoles are technologically superior to the old ones in every aspect (and by a big distance). The games that are becoming worse every day is not a problem of consoles but a problem of gamers who want to play shit games.
And before I get done for being biased towards Sony....
Sod off!
Sod off!
Well the PS3 was cutting edge, but design decisions held it back. Nothing about either of these new consoles is like that. They are made cheap and easy to use, because as I've stated numerous times, they are a stepping stone.
I've been through it, well before the actual announcements. They are a few years old tech showing off graphics that are even older.
Sure to most they represent an improvement, and they obviously are over the previous consoles. But these are cheap to make and cheap to work with for a reason and are well behind the curve we should be on.
2 lives? Bloody amateur.
John Carmack hadn't even used Kinect 2 when he made those comments, he was making them about the original Kinect and said he's not sold on the idea of the Kinect being the cornerstone of next-gen gaming (though admitted it definitely had a 'future'). The new Kinect has it's own processor and has improved massively on this, you can see all this just from watching the demo videos.
So yeah, I trust the IGN guys who have demo'd it - and all those other people who demo'd it at E3 and also commented on how much smoother it is, how the weight distribution is awesome, how the weight distribution recognition and the rotation of joints is picked up so well.
Weaste, you're lying to yourself if you truly believe that the Vita remote play is mostly fine. A ton of games don't support it, there's been very noticable lag when using it and it's a feature that held lots of promise and hardly anybody is using.
Didn't God of War have to get patched to be able to played via remote play on the VITA?
However, I understand and accept that the PS4 has been built with the VITA in mind and so are the PS4 games - I am hoping that their new promises will hold true, and the VITA will be a great companion for the PS4.
Yay, we agree!
The problem is that you talk about latency, yet can't see the obvious lag in that YouTube video!
Show me SmartGlass doing remote play!
Yeah - I think that is also reflected in the price - the PS3 was 600 euros when it launched - the PS4 is much more attractively priced.
When have we not agreed about that?
The shite surrounding the Cell and me being bang on about it's future on the other hand...
Indeed. Wonder if the games will ever drop though?
Well of course a lot of games didn't support it, it was something in the SDK if developers wanted to support it, it wasn't mandated, but that's not the point. I have no clue if GOW HD had to be patched or not, the point is I can see it running on my VITA more or less at around 30fps. My issue here isn't about whether it works or not, but you somehow coming up with the idea that having things on a remote screen is a Microsoft innovation and that Sony is copying them. It's the same with Kinect, Sony has been fecking around with shit like this for years, well before Microsoft ever became a serious player.
When have we not agreed about that?
The shite surrounding the Cell and me being bang on about it's future on the other hand...
Cell still kicks the shit out of this Jaguar bollocks!
They're completely different things. SmartGlass is for devices that people most likely already have.. you don't have to buy a separate piece of hardware.
If the VITA works with remote play on the PS4 - that's awesome, and I've not disputed that anywhere. But it's not direct competition for Smart Glass, and doesn't change that Smart Glass is innovation and good innovation.
As for lag, the Kinect again is completely different - we're not talking about using your kinect on COD are we where a split second can make all the difference?
We're talking about using it to direct squad mates, to browse through the UI, to select items, these are features which would add to the overall experience, where slight barely noticable lag is still better than what the PS4 will offer without Kinect.
Zooming in and out on RTS while also directing squads with voice commands could be done simultaneously while using the controller to attack using a primary squad - you could direct squad mates with your voice in Battlefield while aiming somewhere while cooking a frag using your controller, it's all about adding to the experience and making gaming more convenient and smoother - and I'm confident it can do that.
And this is just ignoring the fun games that can come with the Kinect. I would never play the Kinect alone, but I have had lots of fun on it with family and friends. I'm pretty confident we'll see some good games for it, considering how many are going to be sold through the Xbox One.
The Kinect itself, in basic form isn't an innovation - but I pointed to the features which are innovative in my post. It's ability to identify profiles, it's ability to read heart rates and muscle tension, weight distribution and the rest. Smart Glass is different from the Vita's remote play massively - it's their to support the Xbox, to have menus and information on it or the ability to make in-game changes without the use of on-screen menus.
VITA remote play is a replacement for your TV, where you can play the game on a handheld if for some reason the TV is unavailable or not preferable.
I also mentioned lots of other innovative features which you have completely ignored.
The Vita/Ps4 stuff will always be a sideshow, or Weaste's favourite word "gimmick".
Wasn't the blu-ray drive responsible for PS3s high(er) launch price?
When remote play was first introduced, there were no other devices to deal with. It was actually not even first shown as being remote play, but a second screen where you could display other data. Calling it a Microsoft idea is bollocks, it's always been in Sony's mind.
Like the Wii U then?
Which they kind of ripped off from Nintendo.
To do it on phones/tablets and peoples every day devices?
If we don't want to be specific, we could say that it was originally Nintendos idea right?
Gamecube could use the Gameboy as a second screen, right?
Try telling that to people who think these consoles are 'new'.
Thus my previous posts as to why these things are "easier" to develop for. It's nonsense! It's a downgrade.
There is fanboyism and then there is sounding like a bloody Microsoft salesperson like Alock does.
No, it's never been on Sony's mind at all, you know a company that makes mobile phones, no, never, it's Microsoft's innovation! Yay for innovative Microsoft.
Microsoft have never innovated feck all!
It's a budget generation. I wonder if this will be reflected in the game prices?
And in a couple of years when the real DRM and pay per play shit comes in, that's got to work out cheaper right? Right?
I've given PS4 and Sony plenty of praise in this thread, and I have also given Xbox criticism (mostly before all these 180s).
And I'm the fan boy?