Poll: Xbox One or PS4

[Luis_GT]

Originally Posted by cfusionpm

People are pretending that they actually care about the internet connection, so they gotta slam them left and right. All the while, I'm guessing all of them have had solid reliable internet for at least the past decade. I know I have. This is 2013. If you don't have an internet connection, then a $500 gaming console is the least of your concerns.

It doesn't help that Sony as a company is jumping on the troll wagon and just pissing all over Microsoft. Makes them look desperate and petty. Probably because, despite being an inferior machine, 360 crushed PS3 for most of the last generation. And still crushes it in North America by almost 2:1 today.

There is a world outside of 'Murica... but you guys fail on kniwing that...

Global sales, the ps3 has sold more consoles than the xbox despite kaunching a year later

[denkigrve]

Originally Posted by cfusionpm

So JUST YOUR GRAPHICS CARD was about as expensive as an entire PS4 plus controller. Just setting some context here.

Pfft that's nothing. My 7970 was $500+. Still getting a PS4 as well. I play some games on PC and some games on console. Each one has it's own benefits over the other. Seems that all of the Xb1 exclusives I'd be interested in (Titalfall, the rest didn't interest me. Even titanfall is a "maybe") are coming to PC, so my investment was worth it. The PS4 exclusives are staying PS4, so I get to play all the games, not just the ones limited to one console.

Certain other games I'll only play on PC. FPS games, The Witcher series, etc.

[cfusionpm]

Originally Posted by Luis_GT

There is a world outside of 'Murica... but you guys fail on kniwing that...

Global sales, the ps3 has sold more consoles than the xbox despite kaunching a year later

Both consoles have sold 77 million units worldwide, which is pretty good considering most people elsewhere in the world often scoff American made products, especially electronics. And also considering the name recognition of the Playstation brand and the previous two generations dominated by Sony, we all expected a lot more out of them in 2006. The PS3 sucked and sucked hard for many years. It wasn't until just a few years ago when new features were introduced and a boatload of AAA exclusive titles came in that PS3 really took stride. It was too little too late for me, but it's a huge come back story against a company that is not hurting in sales or popularity whatsoever. They are taking that momentum full stride into the next generation, making as many snide comments as they can.

[n2oinferno]

Originally Posted by denkigrve

Pfft that's nothing. My 7970 was $500+. Still getting a PS4 as well. I play some games on PC and some games on console. Each one has it's own benefits over the other. Seems that all of the Xb1 exclusives I'd be interested in (Titalfall, the rest didn't interest me. Even titanfall is a "maybe") are coming to PC, so my investment was worth it. The PS4 exclusives are staying PS4, so I get to play all the games, not just the ones limited to one console.

Certain other games I'll only play on PC. FPS games, The Witcher series, etc.

Uggggh I spent 500 bucks on a graphics card once. It's something I'll never do again, haha. Especially since the midrange cards are so powerful right now.. Of course, the new console platforms will change that but I'm all for it.

I noticed the PC/Xbone thing too. I thought Titanfall sounded neat but didn't really watch anything about it since I wouldn't have access to it. And then I saw that it was coming to PC as well. I bet that with the Xbone running DX that we'll see a lot of console exclusive ports to PC as well, at least from third party developers. Microsoft already said they're out when it comes to PC publishing. I won't complain about more quality PC ports though!

[SnapOv3st3r]

Just pre-ordered my PS4 through Best Buy and it stated pick-up date was Dec. 31st.

[denkigrve]

Originally Posted by cfusionpm

People are pretending that they actually care about the internet connection, so they gotta slam them left and right. All the while, I'm guessing all of them have had solid reliable internet for at least the past decade. I know I have. This is 2013. If you don't have an internet connection, then a $500 gaming console is the least of your concerns.

It doesn't help that Sony as a company is jumping on the troll wagon and just pissing all over Microsoft. Makes them look desperate and petty. Probably because, despite being an inferior machine, 360 crushed PS3 for most of the last generation. And still crushes it in North America by almost 2:1 today.

No it makes Sony look opportunistic, and it also makes them look like they're concerned about the consumer more than the publisher. MS came off as very publisher focused and not consumer focused.

"Crush" is also the wrong word for world-wide. There was no "crushing" when you account for resales to the same consumer. Everyone loves to talk sales and not actual numbers of working devices. But let's play the numbers game:

http://gamercheeese.com/2013/02/18/x...-numbers-game/

The biggest thing to gain from this article is this:
"The failure rates are said to be between 30 and 50% within the first three years. This could have very well had the effect of increased console sales, since people had to buy replacement Xboxes once their first (and second and third) broke."

That's HUGE. That means as much as MS is touting their sales, a fair number of those sales could be tied to re-purchases buying a new console to replace a broken one. That's not good business, and comes back to MS feeling more "business" focused and less customer focused.

You also can't just compare the "US." The worldwide sales are where things matter in the end game. Developers will want to release games that will hit the largest number of that world-wide install base. The 2:1 and crushing comments are also false. It's a 60/40 split favoring Xbox 360 in the US only, but the rest of the world comes into play and it's 50/50.

http://www.vgchartz.com/analysis/platform_totals/

It's not about which platform is "better" or "worse" it's about offering consumers choice. Without this competition nothing would be as good as it is. So I'm glad it's a 50/50 split, and I'm glad both companies are going to be even closer in terms of performance. No-one is going to "win" or "crush" another. They're simply going to keep competing, and smart developers will release games for both platforms and reap the benefits.

[denkigrve]

Originally Posted by SnapOv3st3r

Just pre-ordered my PS4 through Best Buy and it stated pick-up date was Dec. 31st.

Amazon says the same thing. It's a placeholder date until they have an actual date from Sony. The Xbox is showing "Nov 30, 2013." They can only go on what the companies have said so far, and put the date as far out as they can to avoid upset customers.

MS said "November 2013" so they put the last day to be safe.
Sony said "Holiday 2013" so they put the last day of 2013 to be safe.

Both dates will change as soon as the companies offer the actual release date.

[Ryeong86]

How to Share your Ps4 games with your friends:
[ame="https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kWSIFh8ICaA"]Official PlayStation Used Game Instructional Video - YouTube[/ame]

[denkigrve]

Originally Posted by n2oinferno

Uggggh I spent 500 bucks on a graphics card once. It's something I'll never do again, haha. Especially since the midrange cards are so powerful right now.. Of course, the new console platforms will change that but I'm all for it.

I noticed the PC/Xbone thing too. I thought Titanfall sounded neat but didn't really watch anything about it since I wouldn't have access to it. And then I saw that it was coming to PC as well. I bet that with the Xbone running DX that we'll see a lot of console exclusive ports to PC as well, at least from third party developers. Microsoft already said they're out when it comes to PC publishing. I won't complain about more quality PC ports though!

Eh. I've done the midrange card thing and ended up needing a new card faster. I typically only upgrade the PC once in a while. When the 8800GTX came out I overhauled my entire PC. It took from 2005 to 2009 for me to upgrade again. I then rebuilt in 2011 with an i7 and the 5850, but the 5850 lost a lot of it's legs pretty fast. So in 2012 I bought a 7970, and now I won't need to upgrade again for another few years.

In the end my goals in PC building are to spent a little more up front so I have to upgrade components less. Since in the end I'd be spending $300 every 2ish years for mid-range card. Why not spend $500 up front for a card that will last just as long? That's my philosophy for building since I can't stand not running on "high" or better in the settings on the games I do play on my PC. I'm a visual person, and like seeing games with all of the bells and whistles.

[Ryeong86]

Originally Posted by VADER

Pfft, haha. You sir, know nothing about Xbox. First of all, you don't pay for an account. It's free. The part that costs money is to upgrade it to gold so you can play online and get all of the features. And I'm not talking about sharing the system. I'm saying if a household (like mine) has 2 or 3 Xbox's then now they can all be at a gold membership level and enjoy all of it's benefits without each having to pay for their own. Me and my brothers used to buy our own 12 month code's every year, now we just buy 1 and we all save money.

While on a PS3, you can make an account and play online for free since we already pay for a monthly fee from our cable company, who rob us every month. It just seems microsoft has many ways to suck up your money in small increments... think about it this way: If you purchased the Xbox 360 from the first year it came out, you paid $50 bucks a year for Xbox live. I think it's $50 bucks.... So in 8 years you spent $400 for a service that is free on PS3. Now if you had to pay for multiple accounts.. well I just feel sorry for you.

[cfusionpm]

Originally Posted by denkigrve

No it makes Sony look opportunistic, and it also makes them look like they're concerned about the consumer more than the publisher. MS came off as very publisher focused and not consumer focused.

"Crush" is also the wrong word for world-wide. There was no "crushing" when you account for resales to the same consumer. Everyone loves to talk sales and not actual numbers of working devices. But let's play the numbers game:

http://gamercheeese.com/2013/02/18/x...-numbers-game/

The biggest thing to gain from this article is this:
"The failure rates are said to be between 30 and 50% within the first three years. This could have very well had the effect of increased console sales, since people had to buy replacement Xboxes once their first (and second and third) broke."

That's HUGE. That means as much as MS is touting their sales, a fair number of those sales could be tied to re-purchases buying a new console to replace a broken one. That's not good business, and comes back to MS feeling more "business" focused and less customer focused.

You also can't just compare the "US." The worldwide sales are where things matter in the end game. Developers will want to release games that will hit the largest number of that world-wide install base. The 2:1 and crushing comments are also false. It's a 60/40 split favoring Xbox 360 in the US only, but the rest of the world comes into play and it's 50/50.

http://www.vgchartz.com/analysis/platform_totals/

It's not about which platform is "better" or "worse" it's about offering consumers choice. Without this competition nothing would be as good as it is. So I'm glad it's a 50/50 split, and I'm glad both companies are going to be even closer in terms of performance. No-one is going to "win" or "crush" another. They're simply going to keep competing, and smart developers will release games for both platforms and reap the benefits.

The failure rate should be a testament to the experience people had with 360. In spite of a 30% failure rate, people kept buying it and kept playing it. I'm on my third 360 and would have gotten a fourth if needed. Luckily mine were all replaced for free and without hassle, and my current jasper chip model has been running strong for the last 5 years.

I agree that competition is a good thing, and at the core of the gaming experience, both offerings are more or less the same.

[SnapOv3st3r]

Who Won E3? Check the vote count...

http://www.ign.com/videos/2012/06/16...lts-ign-versus

[Luis_GT]

Originally Posted by cfusionpm

The failure rate should be a testament to the experience people had with 360. In spite of a 30% failure rate, people kept buying it and kept playing it. I'm on my third 360 and would have gotten a fourth if needed. Luckily mine were all replaced for free and without hassle, and my current jasper chip model has been running strong for the last 5 years.

I agree that competition is a good thing, and at the core of the gaming experience, both offerings are more or less the same.

WRONG... the only reason one would buy an xbox again after failure is simple... not having to rebuy a collection again and lose all achievements... nothing to do with experience

[SnapOv3st3r]

Originally Posted by cfusionpm

The failure rate should be a testament to the experience people had with 360. In spite of a 30% failure rate, people kept buying it and kept playing it. I'm on my third 360 and would have gotten a fourth if needed. Luckily mine were all replaced for free and without hassle, and my current jasper chip model has been running strong for the last 5 years.

I agree that competition is a good thing, and at the core of the gaming experience, both offerings are more or less the same.

So your stuff breaking 3 times over is a good thing? Do you apply this to everything you buy? Do you value Quality Control in the products you buy?