The Xbox One and the PS4 aren't the same type of system. That much is obvious. But now that Microsoft changed a number of its policies on the Xbox One, those differences have dwindled a bit.
PS4 is more powerful. Also, we know that we don't have to beg for months just for Sony to change unfair and evil policies.
^All that and Sony has more exclusives
Sony did not announce more exclusives than X1. They did announce a large indie contingent but most (if not all) are timed exclusives... Sony promised KZ, infamous, and Knack for launch. MS promised Forza 5, Deadrising 3, Ryse, Kinect Sports Rivals, and downloadable (free-to-play) Killer Instinct for launch.
Thats debatable. I think ms DRM fiasco really overshadowed their amazing library of games. We all wanted exclusive new IPS from ms and we got games like ryse, quantum break, project spark, sunset overdrive, D4, Titanfall along with forza 5 and halo 5. Games were never the problem with the xbone reveal, and now the DRM crap is gone its gonna be an interesting generation
And as for games, I couldn't tell. They all kind of just blended together with similar color schemes (I kid). The issue of being weaker and more expensive remains. How can you pay more for less? Some people must REALLY love Halo that much lol
@ThatsGaming Last time I counted MS had 10 Xbone exclusives announced at E3, zero exclusives for 360. Sony had 8 exclusives for PS4, and 8 exclusives for PS3! That is 16 total and frankly PS3 titles ALONE already out did any of the Xbone games for me. We know Sony will support their systems unlike what MS did to Xbox and 360 But counting next gen alone right now Sony is only behind by 2 games, but already announced that the power house 1st party developers of Sony are working on PS4 games. Sony with a history of 1st party developers that constantly put out game of the year quality games, plus all the indies jumping to PS4 because MS cheated/treated them like crap, there's really no contest even with the info that's out now. Oh and if you wanna brag about free-to-play games, there are already tons on PS3 now so you know that's what Sony is about to do w/ PS4. And confirmed for PS4, look up a game called Warframe, that is going to be free to play at launch and look at the difference in quality of what you can get out of it for free: A WHOLE game!! as opposed to KI's one character demo which they dare to call F2P which is a joke
I keep seeing the same posts that PS4 is more powerfull. Have we really seen all the specs laid out yet. That Kinect looks big as hell, whats in that for a start. We really don't know. If the PS4 is so much more powerful, how come not one of the games shown so far at E3 and after look any better than the X1 games? In fact in my opinion, some of the X1 games looked better than the PS4 ones. Basically they are even or as close as the PS3 was to the 360. If the PS4 was 50 percent more powerful you would be able to see it a mile off. Perhaps someone would care to explain.
Perhaps you didn't see the Ingame footage of the 1st Party Exclusives such as Infamous SS that's the one that truly looked next Gen nothing on the X1 Looked nearly as good.
I will explain my little xbox boy, it's a LAUNCH lineup. Most games are rushed to meet the launch date. The Xboy toy has 8gb of ram yea, but the xbox is using 3gb of ram for the other shit and xbox ram is a cheaper shit than ps4. Ps4 is a gaming station first. I hope not all the little kids from xbox360 move to ps4, cuz the folks on psn is hella hater free than the little wanna be gangstas in xbox live, always talkin shit from another fuckin state.
Yes, the specs have been laid out. The easiest and most evident is the ram difference between the two consoles. Therefore, it is clearly possible to say that the PS4 has better specs than the XBox. Your statement on games is merely subjective at this point. It may be your opinion that some of the X1 games looked better than the PS4 ones, but the same could easily be said about the PS4 compared to the X1, easily citing KZ:SF as an example. The bottom line is that statements on appearance are subjective. What you will be able to see, and what can be proven in time, is that the more powerful console will be able of doing more in a game, compared to the other.
Who the hell would agree with your comment . FACTS : http://seekingalpha.com/art...
First of all we've barely seen any XBox One gameplay (A lot of trailers and pre rendered stuff). We haven't seen any footage running on Xbox One hardware as it seems they used PCs with very different hardware to show of their games.
Just wait......what game are you playin on 360? Oh nothing????? See how micronerds fuck you and you didn't even know it? Its at the end of the 360 life and they didn't even hook no micronerds fanboys any games. pls respond I have to know what your opinion is, it's goin to be funny like most xnerd gamers
"If the PS4 is so much more powerful, how come not one of the games shown so far at E3 and after look any better than the X1 games?" Read this... http://www.cinemablend.com/... you will see that X-1 was not used at E3, MS used PCs whit Nvidia GTX cards to play the games! Ps4, in other hand, was used in their games... MS is in deep shit
Ima9er4Life "cuz the folks on psn is hella hater free than the little wanna be gangstas in xbox live, always talkin shit from another fuckin state" Comment of the day.. Whos talking ShXt lol lol Oh and launch line up, that's not an excuse. They are both easy for devs this time, theres no complicated CELL. Transporter I did see Infamous and I honestly wasn't cant see how you think that game looked way better...
@EasilyTheBest Okay show me a game that looks nearly as good as Infamous. Go ahead amuse me.
beg for online to be free again, and see how long (if they even consider) they change it
i was just thinking. for ms to cave in to public pressure is very puzzling. ms is like church, they tell the public whats good for them not the other way around. maybe this lends credence to rumors ms is having chip yield and heat issue's and will be down clocking their chips to help manufacturing the new xbox 1.
What about the differences in online experience? PS+, Xbox Live Gold Or F2P Games. Sony announced 30 exclusives in development for PS4. http://www.examiner.com/art... 20 of them will be released in the first year on PS4. New IPs: 1. The Order: 1886 2. DriveClub 3. Knack 4. 5. 6. 7. 8. 9. 10 11. 12. Returning franchises 13. inFamous: Second Son 14. Killzone: Shadow Fall 15. 16. 17. 18. 19. 20. Probably Naugthy Dog is in one of the hidden games or Developers, which is exciting. And Guerilla Games confirmed they are working in a new IP in parallel with Killzone SF. And is very likely Sony will reveal more at Gamescom and TGS And MS said they will be at TGS, so they may reveal more exclusives. Just collecting facts for what console should I consider more to buy.
On the other hand instead of listing blank list of future potential exclusives that we know nothing about ms have announced: 1- Ryse 2- sunset overdrive 3- dead rising 3 4- quantum break 5- project spark 6- crimson dragon 7- D4 8- Titanfall (also available on PC) With returning franchises: 1- forza 5 2- killer instinct 3 the new halo Both the ps4 and the xbone libraries are impressive, its not a ps3 vs Xbox 360 situation anymore. Hopefully ms continue to pump the exclusives in the upcoming years.
project spark is available on PC too.
Ps4 requires u to buy online & x1 requires Kinect!
The XB1 requires a Gold account not only to play online but also to access services such as Netflix that you've already paid for. On the PS4 you don't need PS+ to access those extra services, only to access online multi-player.
however, the only ppl that can claim ps has free features such as netflix or internet browsing are the ppl that NEVER play online...the second you buy ps+ for multiplayer, you are essentially buying PS+ for netflix and all those other features scenerio you are a ps user and free member, you are watching tv, netflix and internet all for free, game 1 comes out and you want to play multiplayer, so you buy ps+ for a year, 2 months down the road you stop playing that game and continue to watch netflix and browse the internet on ps and will resume playing online 3 months later when game 2 comes out now tell me, does your ps+ subscription pause since you arent going to be playing online for 3 months till game 2 comes out? answer, obviously not...you are still paying ps+ to watch netflix and browse the internet...same as xbox live...ONLY ppl that can claim psn still has free features are ppl that will NEVER play online on ps4
That is just a ridiculous argument. You have access to netflix etc. whether or not you subscribe to PS+. Just because you have PS+ doesn't suddenly mean you're paying for netflix. Your argument is thoroughly lacking in logic. If you really are only going to play online occasionally then just get it one month at a time. But for me it doesn't matter since I've had PS+ since day 1. There is just so much value there that it's silly not to get it.
i said the only ones that can claim psn is free are the ones that never play online...if you do play online, you are theoretically paying for all the other features, if you ALWAYS play online, then you are definitely paying for the other features because you werent using it for free from the beginning for a person that would be gaming randomly online, paying monthly still holds the same problem, what if he games for a week and gets bored of it due to it being a bad game or not as advertised, then the remaining weeks is still wasted and payed for regardless of the fact that these are all hypothetical scenerios, the fact remains, the only ones that can claim psn has free features are the ones that never play online, other than that, you are theoretically paying for those features
@SixZeroFour Well, that's one way to downplay a positive. Let's apply that logic to something else... "however, the only ppl that can claim xbox lets you do anything for free are the ppl that NEVER buy XBL Gold...the second you buy XBL Gold for multiplayer, you are essentially buying XBL Gold for everything" Yup. Sounds dumb there too. Hey, we can do the opposite too! "however, the only ppl that can claim ps has paid online play are the ppl that NEVER had PS+...if you already have ps+ for the games, you are essentially getting free multiplayer" Free multiplayer guyz! Nope, still sounds dumb.
PS+ gives you far more value than your money, and yes you get well over $100 worth of product for your initial $50 investment. The two aren't even comparable.
100$? Dude, you're being shy. It's more like 300$+ of free games. Every month, there is at least one 29.99$+ game for free. 30 x 12 = 360$. And that's the minimum of value you get. It's not counting the free avatars, themes, budget games, Vita/PSP games, exclusive demos etc. I honestly can say that this is one of the best 50$ I ever invested in my life, and no, Sony's not paying me. (Well yes they are actually, with all those games! ;) )
@rlacorne No, I completely agree with you, but trolls would blow it out of proportion if I kept it honest. I also didn't wanna have to go and total up all the crap I get to show proof of an astronomical value like the one you said, albeit it true and I agree. And yes, it is the best $50 on gaming I've ever spent.
Um PS4 requires PS+ which gives you free games monthly plus more services for 49.99. X1 requires Kinect + Gold Memebership for less features and costs 59.99
ha i would never trust microshaft EVER.
It seems that the ps4 is still winning.
Well until now MS wasn't even competing.
Yes they were lol thats what companies do they compete lol.
You didn't get it.
one is for gamers, and one is for people who play games.
one is for gamers, and ONE is for people that play games and watch tv.
Funny Microsoft didn't mention TV once at E3 yet Sony did a 15 minute thing about it...
@Mikefizzled they didn't have to mention TV at E3 because they spent an hour talking about it at their console reveal lol. last time i checked, 60 minutes > 15 minutes. try harder, xbot.
I must of watched a different one to you. In mine there was 30 minutes of TV, sports and social then the rest on games, specs, and new features... E3 is for games and for once Microsoft did that right.
Forget the spec for a moment, for me it is all about the games. I would have gone with a PS4 but they don't have anything exclusive that make me want to buy the system in the first year. I saw Forza 5, Killer Instict, Titanfall, DR3 on Xbox One and I was willing to get a Xbox One even when it had these DRM restrictions. Now that that restriction is gone, it is really a no brainer for me to go with a Xbox One first. That is just me though.
It comes down to the individual preferences. I for one like the PS4 games more cause I think there is more variaty. And I like how Sony is treating indie devs so it's easy for me to pick the PS4 especially when it's less expensive.
Yep, it's all about preferences. For me, I'm looking forward to Disgaea 5, the next Atelier cycle, the next LittleBigPlanet and the next VanillaWare games. For those, it's Sony. For other games that people are excited about, it could very well be on Xbox or Wii-U. As long as everybody gets to play the games they like, we should rejoice! And we should rejoice even more when everybody gets to do that without stupid DRM restrictions! :) I'm very happy for Xbox fans that were mad at all this!
For me, PS2 > Titanfall. I don't play racing games, KI looks terribly boring. DR3 looks okay though, but I wouldn't buy a console for it, especially with DayZ possibly coming to PS4. DR3 still seems too... idk, arcadey/jokey to me, which doesn't appeal to me as much. On PS4, I'm excited for Indie titles mostly,
There are subtle differences between the presumed architectures that journalists either don'tunderstand, or leave out intentionally. example: GDDR5 has more bandwidth than DDR3. More bandwidth accelerates GPU parallelism (PS4 advantage -- most journalists will state this) DDR3 has less latency than GDDR5. Low latency accelerates CPU game-code work. (XB1 advantage -- most journalists don't know this) Latency is a pretty big factor, in modern day computing -- the differences between different memory architectures' latency can have a noticeable impact. Ask any PC gamer who has experienced 7-7-7 kicking the tail of 10-10-10. High bandwidth is good... for a GPU. Low latency is good for a CPU. Unfortunately, they don't go hand-in-hand -- its a tradeoff, and the bandwidth is marketed more heavily, because bigger numbers are "easier" to understand, for the masses (and most games are GPU bound, on PCs anyway). On a fixed system, where the amount of CPU power available is reliable, the CPU can, and will, become a bottleneck.
N4G is a community of gamers posting and discussing the latest game news. It’s part of NewsBoiler, a network of social news sites covering today’s pop culture.