I'm not sure many people will see it that way. I'm sure many people will see a $500 Wii-U with a Playstation logo slapped on it and think "no thanks".
No, for the PS4 to shine and for the Vita to shine, they need to shine on their own. I'm totally fine with some cross-compatibility and added features (like I said, I'm gonna use Remote Play quite a bit), but the systems need to be their own thing.
What's your point? I'm not disagreeing, but what's your point? The article asks if polls prove most hardcore gamers are Playstation fans.
To which I reply: no. The polls prove that most hardcore gamers are game fans, irregardless of brand loyalty. Many die-hard brand loyalists (like the examples I gave above) are actually pretty casual, all things considered.
The author also makes a completely baseless argument that there's NO WAY the polls wi...
While I personally am going to use the heck out of the Remote Play feature, I don't see how a Vita+PS4 combo would do anything significant. If it didn't work for the Wii-U ($300) why would it work for this rumored bundle ($500)?
This poll began after the DRM reversal, by the way.
I don't think all the poll results prove most hardcore gamers are Playstation fans. They just prove that Sony is catering far better to hardcore gamers than Microsoft, and there is a difference.
I think there's a distinction between "brand loyalist" and "hardcore gamer". Of cour...
I agree that the controversy is contrived.
If games are art, then the market decides what is and is not acceptable and appropriate. It is really that simple. That is precisely how it works in literally every other medium (canvas, photo, music, film, writing, sculpture, etc)
You can't - in good faith - criticize a game's art style and visual direction while at the same time trying to make an argument that "games are art, too", which is someth...
When were they taken out? The latest one has them both iirc.
If f2p takes off like a rocket on consoles (up until now, it's only been a minor attraction) then Microsoft is going to need to either
a) change their policy, or
b) get left in the dust
People interested in f2p aren't going to want to pay a yearly sub to...you know, play these free games.
Heck yes I am.
I would stealth troll on my 360, but it RRoD'd in 2008.
(see? so easy)
Is this really "news"? I thought that Microsoft killed the family plan to put everyone under one Gold account? At least, that's the way it is on Xbox One, to my knowledge.
Maybe it's a way to get people to upgrade from 360 to X1? I dunno. Someone please clarify.
It's not really a "controversy" per se, it's just good ol' competition. Both consoles are making a value proposition. For $399 you get a PS4 plus all these extra features. For $499 you get an Xbox One with a lot of features missing.
"But Xbox One has those features too!"
Yes, if you pay roughly $60 a year. And that's why some people don't want to deal with it. I've let my PS+ sub lapse. I've let my XBLG sub laps...
"Competition is good for the industry" is too broad of a phrase. I think we can all agree that if competition from, say, Candy Crush was causing all AAA games to tank, that would not be competition that we'd like to see.
Personally, I think gaming in the 80s and 90s thrived because competition was tangible, practical, real due to the arcades. See a game, it looks cool, drop a quarter, the game is mediocre, shuffle 6 feet down the column and play a different game...
But just like what happened with PS3, people should give Microsoft a fair chance to make up for their mistakes, as long as Microsoft does indeed reverse their behavior and make up for their mistakes.
Like iamsuperman said, I think the days of a "killer app" are gone. You need to have long-term support for a console to make it a success.
While I agree with you that it is a bit silly to say Xbox One is "catching up" to PS4 due to the inclusion of a headset, there is a valid reason why some have been saying that.
Originally, Microsoft confirmed that no headset would be included with the Xbox One and that Kinect would be the default voice chat method with optional headset support if you bought your own.
Especially if you want to pick up a lot of great single-player games (online is fine, too. But that's not what I'm getting at). 360 has a pretty sizable back-catalog of exclusives still worth playing. Wii and PS3 have a lot of hidden gems as well.
No problem yo. It was a good blog. I hear ya in regards to the general premise of their games, especially Mario, and I don't think that's a bad premise. I just wish they'd let Mario explore some new worlds like the good ol' days, as silly as that sounds.
I think we've had a conversation like this before. :P
Yes, Microsoft has decided to make some changes prior to the Xbox One launching. As for me, I'm all about brand reputation and the company that stands behind a product. That's just me. Not everyone is like me, but it is my explanation for why I am not nearly as willing to just "let it go" on certain issues. I'm more than happy to let Microsoft earn my trust. But they hav...
"Oh but a console has no games unless they are specifically exclusive right?"
Where did I say that? I said Micrsoft doesnt support the 360. In fact, Microsoft is taking away games from 360 to pad out the Xbox One's launch library. I never once said "Hurr CAPCOM doesn't support the 360" or "hurr Konami and Namco Bandai don't support the 360! Failz!"
I said (and guess what? You can scroll up and read it for yourself) <...
I'm confused by your analogy. PS4 has a not-insignificant edge over the Xbox One in terms of price and hardware power. So, how was the criticism "genuinely warranted" for the PS3 (your words) but not for Xbox One? Just curious. To think that the only issues people have with Xbox One are the now-gone DRM policies is silly. Those were certainly the most outrageous issues, yes, but they were not the only issues, not by a long shot.