Gaming magnate Peter Molyneux, never one to shy away from voicing his opinion on the industry's going-ons, has said that the Xbox One has been wrongly treated by the public.
John carmack an asshole too? he defended the move and says its a withchunt. How about the devs that spoke out in favor of MS stance they assholes too? this will be the case next gen period, digital media will be how consoles distribute media. the way it is now is archaic, MS just marketed a great idea VERY VERY poorly.
I'm tired of hearing carmack name like he is the king of video games there's other developers who r just as smart can we leave carmack name out for awhile just to prove a point
It's safe to assume charging extra to play online for a game you paid for is probably bad too right? Sony is giving everything and anything away to get people to buy. The ones that simply want to play games on their PS4 have to pay a fee to play online. Doesn't that give up the ability to do what you want with a game, a type of DRM and a BS way to get money from you after the initial purchase? We all know the same thing happens with Live, but you can't point fingers at one and not the other for attempting to run a business.
As for non of this BS hitting any other media industry, there is no other industry like it. Musicians tour, movies and radio get royalties for each time they play. Many pay to see movies at theaters for a one time viewing then go on to rentals and DVD release. Game developers get paid once at initial sale. Why do you think Sony and Microsoft have shut down so many studios?
@Hellsvacancy
The Netflix arguement is so weak. Microsoft isn't forcing anyone to pay fees on top of Netflix fees. As a Live subscriber you have access to Netflix, Hulu, the TW app, etc. You are going about things in reverse order to make an arguement. There are currently 50 million Xbox Live subscribers and 80 million consoles sold. Taking multiple owners and replacement consoles out brings you one hell of a Live to consoles ratio. Smart TV's, sub $100 Blu-ray players and devices like the Roku at $39 give people multiple options for watching Netflix if you don't connect your console to the service. The reality is most people that take advantage of Netflix also subscribe to Live if they own an Xbox. If you want to play online with your PS4, placing Netflix on either side of the paywall is a moot point.
@Death: "The ones that simply want to play games on their PS4 have to pay a fee to play online."
Do they? Do they really? So you're saying if I bought a PS4 right now, I couldn't play my copy of DC Universe Online without paying for online? Because Sony disagrees with you. See, Sony says "free-to-play games don't require PS+ for multiplayer."
Sony also says "asynchronous online doesn't require PS+"
Sony also says "online features of single player games don't require PS+ to use."
So... are you saying that Sony is wrong and that a person CAN'T play their PS4 games online without PS+ under those conditions? Or are you just continuing on your mission to make the PS4 look bad since no one in the media can?
**EDIT** "There are currently 50 million Xbox Live subscribers and 80 million consoles sold."
25 million Live GOLD subscribers bud, 50 million total subscribers including Silver accounts. And those numbers are irrelevant. Silver users can't access Netflix on their Xbox consoles. You can spin it all you want by saying "real gamers will have a Gold subscription anyway and only want it for games" but that's an insult to Silver accounts that are being punished with no access to Netflix because they refuse to give Microsoft $5 a month just so they can access an app they already pay $8 a month + ISP fees to have.
MS do not have any responsibility in maintaining Netflix and do not provide the service, they have no right forcing people to pay for access to it.
If Microsoft believed that all games would go digital download, and that Gamestop would die in the process, then they would have just made the Xbone a download-only console. But they did not do that because they knew that the marketplace is not going there, at least not in the next generation.
Gamers like to own their games, period. No one would take a download only console seriously. So Microsoft tried to use its market power to take ownership away from the gamers.
You are taking the edge case and talking as if it is the norm.
What about all the other multiplayer games that aren't f2p, are they feeless to play multiplayer?
Of course not!
Half your game is locked up, how could Sony?!
Point being, on Xbox One, it is the devils work and on the PS4, it is a gift from heaven.
"MS do not have any responsibility in maintaining Netflix and do not provide the service, they have no right forcing people to pay for access to it."
MS created the Netflix app and maintain it, updating it so you get a universal experience and makes enhancements to the UI. They were also the one that started seamless transitions, something nobody did at the time of release.
If people don't want to pay, there is PS4, PS3 and a myriad of small devices that cost the same as a year of PS+ membership.
If you want to take the stand that online is free with PS4 because of subscription based MMO's, you are also stating that Xbox Live is free too. PSU and FFXI were both subscription based and neither required Gold to play. http://www.playonline.com/f...
"online features of single player games don't require PS+ to use" What is an online feature of a single player game? DLC and expansions? Pretty sure you can buy this stuff with a silver account also. Are you referring to notifications and chat requests? Those are "free" with PS+, but kind of useless if you don't play online.
"The fullest expression of Ballmer’s ambition is Microsoft’s cloud computing strategy. About 40 million people subscribe to the $60-per-year Xbox live service that delivers games and television shows." -Newsweek Interview from 2012 with Steve Ballmer. http://www.businessweek.com...
@nukeitall: "You are taking the edge case and talking as if it is the norm."
Neither of us have the authority or knowledge to state what is or is not the norm. I'm talking about a real potential that can't be refuted. People DO play offline. People DO play f2p multiplayer games. And on ONE console, a subscription is NOT required to gain full use of the device while on another it is.
"What about all the other multiplayer games that aren't f2p, are they feeless to play multiplayer? Of course not! Half your game is locked up, how could Sony?!"
What about them? If you want to play those games on the PS4 then you have that choice and can buy PS+ to play them. If you want to play those games on Xbox One then you have that choice as well with the same necessity for buying a subscription.
But if you want to play an f2p game on the PS4, you don't need PS+. If you want to watch Netflix on PS4, you don't need PS+. If you want to enjoy online features in a single player game, you don't need PS+. You can't say the same about the Xbox One. The Devil is in the details nuke. Sony charging for multiplayer isn't, in a basic sense, any better than MS doing so. It's not something that anyone can legitimately be happy about on a basic level. But one service offers a lot that you don't have to pay extra for, while offering you a lot of bonus content and other incentives; while the other service forces all extra features behind their paywall as if to say that they are responsible for maintaining and providing those extras when they are not. Which one sounds worse to you?
To put it another way, Sony is offering you a car with A.C., a sound system upgrade, and heated seats at no extra charge while Microsoft, as a middleman salesman, is forcing you to join their Auto club and pay the monthly dues just to be able to use those same extras.
"MS created the Netflix app and maintain it, updating it so you get a universal experience and makes enhancements to the UI. They were also the one that started seamless transitions, something nobody did at the time of release."
MS are not responsible for maintaining the Netflix service, updating their own software is not on Netflix or the users to pay for, and basically everything they do for their own console and software is their problem not anyone else's. They have no right to charge extra for a service they do not own, do not maintain, do not control the content of, and in no way have any part in the operation business of said service. Netflix would be well within their rights to sue Microsoft for trying to co-opt profits by making part of their userbase pay extra for access to their service.
Unless Microsoft is giving Netflix a cut of Live revenue, which they most certainly are not, then Microsoft own no rights to anything involving Netflix and thus have NO RIGHTS to lock a product they own no rights to behind their own proprietary pay wall. It's shady business down to the core.
@Death: If you want to live in the Past with FFXI and PSU to try and make your Present point legitimate, which you haven't done, then I can say that PS3 trumps your example since it is now, and always will be, capable of free online multiplayer for all of its games. And since you have a problem reading, I never mentioned subscription based MMO's, I said free-to-play games. Different subject altogether.
"What is an online feature of a single player game? DLC and expansions? Pretty sure you can buy this stuff with a silver account also. Are you referring to notifications and chat requests? Those are "free" with PS+, but kind of useless if you don't play online."
An online feature is any feature that requires access to the internet to use. With the exception of synchronous multiplayer gameplay, all conceivable features (unless they are a part of said multiplayer gameplay) requiring online do NOT require a PS+ subscription to gain access to. And what you consider to be useless or not is completely irrelevant as we are not talking about the gaming industry according to N4G user Death.
As for your quote and link, try using one that has a source and didn't just pull numbers out of their anal cavity.
Not to break your heart, but most Xbox fanboys really don't care about the "console wars". The most vocal I see are the hardcore Playstation fans. I honestly don't know any hardcore Xbox fans. The group of friends that I typically play with have multiple consoles and follow the games. I'm not saying Xbox zealots don't exist, but from my experience most Xbox fans are a little more mature and don't expect the Xbox to "win" like the Sony fans. Even today, we don't see many Xbox fans saying the XboxOne will dominate. Journalists looking for hits do, but not many fans. PS fans are generally mean and use personal attacks to defend their choice instead of fact based arguements.
lol, Dragoknight did you just try to pretend ps4's online gaming is still semi-free because of a few f2p games? Wow, so sony locks the reason 99% of gamers are willing to pay for a online behind the pay wall like Microsoft does and you kids scream about well at least the other 1% of crumbs like netflix is free. Yippie, thanks Sony.
Its like dinning out at two different local expensive restaurants. Only one of them served you a free glass of water with your meal, which is nice, but ultimately you what you WANT is a great meal. All the free glasses of water in the world aren't going to keep you coming back when the other restaurant down the street serves you better food.
I love you Xbox fanboys. When unable to successfully refute an argument, bust out words like "most Xbox fanboys" and "99% of gamers." Because we all know that the Xbox fan mentality is blanket generalizations stemming from Mother Microsoft's arrogant ideal about where the industry should be headed and that's where everyone is connected, no one has bills besides what they pay to Microsoft, and it's ok to double dip.
And of course, any who don't immediately jump in to the Xbox fan bandwagon or who take issue with MS gouging everyone are immediately paupers who should just "Deal With It" right?
Yep, perfectly fine to charge people twice for one service. Welcome to Xbox Fans R Us.
NO... the Carmack argument DOES NOT WORK HERE. The difference is that MS tried to SCREW gamers... the backlash was just, and led to MS changing their policies.
The backlash against the initial policies of the XBOX One were important to stopping a fundamental change in the industry which would empower publishers while screwing devs, retail and gamers.
Anyone who does not see what MS tried to do is either completely blind, or completely ignorant. Should the backlash continue??? That is up for debate, but the initial backlash of MS's policies on XBOX One is not. Where were the XBOX fanboys when MS was pushing their crap policies??? They were silent because they knew it was crap... now they act like it NEVER HAPPENED.
First it was RAM, but then that got shot down so time to move on. Then it was Indies are the god given lay of land when Sony offered self publishing. But now MS does it also so the Sony fans have to move on to something else. Now it's F2P outside the paywall, now all of a sudden no one will pay for PS+, they'll only play F2P games and watch Netflix.
They'll holler "Options"! And spin around as fast and hard as possible. Good luck paying for PS+ and your Netflix subscription and paying micro transactions for your F2P games.
Dragonknight raise your hand if YOU are getting a ps4 but have no intention of paying for online gaming?
No. I didn't think so...we both get full use of each particular service, because you and I both know we are going to be gaming online, yet its YOU who continues to SPEAK FOR OTHERS, making "blanket generalizations" about all these potential xbox owners who will be screwed because of a paywall for distant secondary features. lol, ironically you are doing exactly what you're accusing others of.
Again both of us are going to the restaurant to PAY for good food...I nope you enjoy your free water, I liked my steak better.
Free to Play isn't necessarily "free". DCU is a perfect example. It's an MMO with a a free to play option for non-subscribers. The free part has a item and level cap until you subscribe unless you are content playing a small portion of the game. It is more a demo with microtransactions. To get all the features and benefits it is $15/month or $120/year with Legendary access.
@JokesOnYou: From when I get the PS4 and into the foreseeable future of what we are shown, I have no reason to get a PS+ subscription. I am primarily a single player gamer with exceptions being the Souls series, so please don't talk for me.
"yet its YOU who continues to SPEAK FOR OTHERS, making "blanket generalizations" about all these potential xbox owners who will be screwed because of a paywall for distant secondary features. lol, ironically you are doing exactly what you're accusing others of."
Actually, I said no such thing. I said that the Xbox One locks features they don't own behind their own proprietary pay wall, I said they have no right to do so because they don't own the feature, I said the PS4 doesn't do that. Nowhere did I say anything about anyone "being screwed." What Microsoft are doing is immoral and beyond justification, but if an Xbox fan wants to spend their money on Live it's their money. Doesn't mean anyone has to agree with Microsoft's underhanded double dipping.
"Again both of us are going to the restaurant to PAY for good food...I nope you enjoy your free water, I liked my steak better."
Steak is such a pedestrian example to use for something of increased value for the cost.
@Death: Poor example is poor. It works against you. A level cap is not a denial of service now is it. Where's the absolutely free equivalent of DCUO for the Xbox One hmmm? A game that doesn't require Live Gold? Oh that's right, there is none.
@dragon, actually the netflix app (not the service) is created by Ms specifically for the xbox. it uses silverlight as the streaming engine.
The variant that sony uses was developed by a 3rd party for both the PS3 and the wii. I believe they were based on the roku box application which do not use silverlight. so while Ms does not maintain the "service" they do maintain the application layer that links the service to the system.
I believe every media app that is on the xbox live marketplace is done by MS so they are constantly improving the performance. optimizing it for the user and the input method the user has (controler, voice, kinect)
And this:
"To put it another way, Sony is offering you a car with A.C., a sound system upgrade, and heated seats at no extra charge while Microsoft, as a middleman salesman, is forcing you to join their Auto club and pay the monthly dues just to be able to use those same extras."
has to be the most idiotic thing i have read. Not saying you are an idiot, but that this comment is idiotic (there is a difference).
i do hope you realize that Ms didnt have to do any of these things they have done to improve the live service over the years. But they did and anyone who is a gold member prior got all sorts of perks to remain a gold member.
Sony couldnt charge for their service upfront because it paled in comparison. I always said sony would eventually charge and guess what...i was right. sony charging for their service is just the sign of the times and nothing to get upset over. They want to make $$$ just like any other company.
you cant fault them for testing the waters with PS+ and finding there were lots of fish to be caught. Between the two, they are both fishing with different bait and both are looking to catch a boat load of fish. does it matter if each one is in their own boat doing it their own way?
you are on the sony boat, we get that so why does it matter who rides in the Ms boat? Obviously to them they are getting a good experience and no matter how many waves you make jumping up and down you are only causing your own boat to rock. There are other in your same boat that would prefer you stop making waves.
@darth: "so while Ms does not maintain the "service"..."
Completely irrelevant. No one is paying for the app, they are paying for the service. Unless you're trying to say that the inclusion of the app itself, and not the actual service, is justification to put it behind a $5 a month paywall, increasing the cost of Netflix from $8 a month to $5 a month for something that amounts to an image and a different interface?
"I believe every media app that is on the xbox live marketplace is done by MS..."
Also completely irrelevant. No one asked MS to step in and do minor, hardly noticeable "tweaks" to any 3rd party apps on Live. And because they are 3rd party apps, unless given permission by the owners, MS aren't allowed to make any changes or additions to the apps themselves.
Regardless of that fact, you have yet to make a legitimate case for putting these apps, especially the free ones, behind Microsoft's pay wall. Microsoft do not own the services, they do not put the work in to maintain the services, they aren't responsible for the content of the services, thus they have no rights to be making profits from blocking those services behind Live Gold.
"has to be the most idiotic thing i have read. Not saying you are an idiot, but that this comment is idiotic (there is a difference)."
Elaborate.
"i do hope you realize..."
Again irrelevant. This means nothing in relation to charging for apps MS don't own. Also, had they not done what they already didn't have to do, they could have been in a much different place business-wise.
"Sony couldnt charge for their service upfront because it paled in comparison."
Implying, with no shred of evidence, that Sony would have charged to begin with and ignoring that Nintendo haven't. Just because a service may or may not be inferior (which is subjective, especially now) doesn't mean it can't be charged for. Especially if that would mean money to improve the service.
"I always said sony would eventually charge and guess what...i was right."
Depends on the time reference. Sony is never going to charge for PS3 online, so if you said they were going to do that eventually, you'd be wrong. Either way, no reason to pat yourself on the back.
"sony charging for their service is just the sign of the times and nothing to get upset over. They want to make $$$ just like any other company."
Missing the point. Sony is only charging for multiplayer gaming, MS is charging for that and much more.
"why does it matter who rides in the Ms boat?"
It doesn't, but it also doesn't mean I can't tell someone that they caught a catfish from the Detroit River either.
Bottom line: You can pretend that people who want Live don't primarily want it for Netflix or other free apps all you want to, but the fact remains that Microsoft think that including those apps was important for their social network plans and understand that people do and/or will use them. They do not own the apps, they have no right to charge extra for accessing those apps. Their competition doesn't charge for those apps because it goes against common sense to do so. There is no justification for it regardless of how many fish analogies, blanket generalizations, and irrelevant past examples anyone can come up with.
Developers play an important part in the industry, and they have a right to voice their opinions and what not.
You know who else plays an important part in the game industry? Consumers. I'm one of those. And I will be happy to express what it is I want, because it is my money I'm spending.
If big companies want to tell me how it is, then they better show me why it's worth my money. If they can't do that, I'll take my money elsewhere.
Consumerism is a two way street. I'm sick of people that keep telling me and others that what we want doesn't matter. If the past few months has shown us anything, what we want seems to matter a great deal to companies that want to sell their products.
"It's the future" cries be damned. I'm sick of that mantra like everything is so black and white. Why the hell are so many gamers so narrow minded and so willing to give in. Even if you are on board for "the future", why they insist that everyone else has to buy a ticket to ride?
Can't we just let everyone enjoy the things they like, the way they like them? Doing so allows for things to happen naturally, and eventually there would be no need for companies to risk the hate, because they may one day get what they want.
something just hit the ship, one of the crew felt the bump and he thought its a huge iceberg that hit 'em, he panic(thats him, mr.peter) puts down one of the life boat and jump. next thing he knew its just a lumber not bigger than a sofa. he yells back at the crew still on ship "HELP me go back on board"
because his games were half ass fable began to fail and his bs with Milo,so the fan backlash is why he left, i would of left too all he is fake promises
First it was the whole DRM issue. Now that is sorted people have gone back to crying about the Xbox Live paywall, that has existed for quite some time.
Yes, the paywall isn't necessarily fair but realistically, are you paying Gold just for Netflix?
Tell me, how many of you are going to play for PSN Plus? I suspect the vast majority of you seeing as you need it now to play online. Everyone made a big noise about that before by the way, paying to play, but are remarkably quiet on that front today. Yes, as a matter of principle, the paywall sucks. But realistically, it affects very few gamers.
Regarding the Kinect being 'forced' on users. People simply don't get it. The Kinect is an integral part of the Xbox One experience. It is the main thing that differentiates it from the PS4. Without it, the Xbox One would just be a PS4, with slightly weaker specs. What is the point of owning a Nintendo Wii U without the tablet controller? Kinect being bundled with the console has a lot of advantages.
Many people on here keep on whinging about the Xbox One, but its the same people on here who never intended on buying the console in the first place. The usual culprits crying and making mountain out of molehills.
Also, the double-standards here are so frustrating. When the likes of Kojima and other developers have stated that the consoles are quite similar in terms of power, everyone starts branding them sellouts on here. All of a sudden, everyone here magically become game developers, and more knowledgeable than the industry veterans at that. But YouTube trolls down-voting videos is somehow legit right?
The backlash is unfair because, whilst MS made mistakes, it went a long way to rectify them. When they did rectify them, people start complaining about the u-turn on their policies. The backlash, whilst initially understandable, has become a farce and a poor reflection of the so-called 'gaming' community that exists on this site and others.
"Tell me, how many of you are going to play for PSN Plus? I suspect the vast majority of you seeing as you need it now to play online"
With the offers PSN Plus has given us over the years I don't think people will mind as much with all the freebies we'll be getting. At least for those people who don't go online but use Netflix and stuff they won't have to buy it.
"Regarding the Kinect being 'forced' on users. People simply don't get it. The Kinect is an integral part of the Xbox One experience. It is the main thing that differentiates it from the PS4. Without it, the Xbox One would just be a PS4"
I'm sick of this argument, the 360 doesn't have forced Kinect, does that make it a PS3...no it doesn't. Your forgetting about the exclusives on each console they are what separate the two consoles aswell. If you want Uncharted for example get a PS4, if you want Halo then you'll get an Xbox One...HOWEVER the problem with that is if you want to play on things like Halo/Gears you'll have to pay for and use Kinect, people DO NOT want that. So no it wouldn't be a PS4, it would just be an Xbox One where we don't have to pay for something we aren't going to use and where we can enjoy the exclusives that system has to offer
"Many people on here keep on whinging about the Xbox One, but its the same people on here who never intended on buying the console in the first place. The usual culprits crying and making mountain out of molehills."
Some people wouldn't of bought one anyway...true but you can't really tell who is and who isn't going to buy one. Kinect is the main thing now which is putting the ones who want one off.
Seriously if Kinect is optional then everyone wins. They'll have more sales, people who want Kinect can enjoy it and the ones who don't want it can enjoy it. Why would no one want that
EDIT: Disgarees....what you wouldn't want everyone to enjoy it with the console having options. Selfish
Well said and I agree with you. All the fan boys just bounce around from on thing to another on here. If you look at the number of xbox live gold members it is around 3 quarters of the people who own a 360 so it is a market people are willing to pay for and a big money maker for Microsoft and this is the reason why Sony have decided to make PS+ a must to play online with the PS4.
If people are buying a xbox one for Netflix then they really do have money to burn as there are other ways to watch netfilx on your tv. Most TV's DVD/Bluray players have the app built in now.
I also think the fuss being made about the one is just people being over the top. When they announced the DRM I was happy to have it as it added things to the One experience but now its not got it it works in the same way as the 360 for games needing to be in the console to play them.
As for Kinect I am looking forward to seeing what it can do when it comes to developers minds as this is not just an add on it is a very big upgrade from Kinect 1.0 and it is more like Project Natal which got a lot of people on here excited when it was shown off. Also the console has been built around Kinect and Xbox live and this is what made the 360 better than the PS3 as PSN was an after thought with the PS3 and the reason why it was missing things Xbox live had and the reason why Sony have made the PS4 around PSN. But With the One being made around Kinect 2 rather than it being an addon like on the 360 it gives MS and other developers to make the most of the device as every console will ship with Kinect 2 where the PS Eye/Move will not get a lot of support again because it dose not ship with the console.
I also think the xbox one is going to sell a lot better than people on this site think it is as it is not hated half as much in the real world as on here. If we look back not so long ago they were making out the 3DS was DOA and the PSV was going to be the best selling console on the market but look what happened there.
If I bought an xbox one and lived somewhere with easy access to high speed internet I wouldn't want to pay for gold as I'm not interested in online gaming and I stream my media through other means.
This means that single player games that benefit from cloud inhanced graphics or AI are the only things behind the paywall thats an incentive for me...
The ability to play single player games at their peak is behind that paywall also... and its disgusting
"With the offers PSN Plus has given us over the years I don't think people will mind as much with all the freebies we'll be getting."
That's besides the point. How many people on here ridiculed 360 owners for simply paying to play online? Yes, PSN + adds value to the service, but the fact remains that a lot of people on here weren't so silent in negotiating with their 360 counterparts on the issue. Now, their acceptance of it frankly makes them look ridiculous.
**I'm sick of this argument, the 360 doesn't have forced Kinect, does that make it a PS3...no it doesn't.**
But this isn't the Xbox 360 we're talking about. Its the Xbox One. People are so resistant to change and they are basing their hate on the old Kinect, which was unresponsive and wasn't as integral a part of the console as the Kinect 2.0 is for the X1.
**Seriously if Kinect is optional then everyone wins**
No they don't. I would be absolutely be disappointed if Kinect was not mandatory. Its removal is akin to having the Xbox 360 arcade with the optonal HDD in my opinion. There are key advantages to having it bundled with the console. Developers can now truly cater for the hardware knowing that everyone has one and we will really see some uses for it. If its droped, then it really does become a PS4. Variety is key.
"Regarding the Kinect being 'forced' on users. People simply don't get it. The Kinect is an integral part of the Xbox One experience"
It doesn't change the fact it's still being forced on users. The first kinect was received with a very mixed reception and many gamers had no interest in it to begin with and many of those who gave it a chance were left disappointed. While I won't deny it has advantages, it still feels like Microsoft are forcing it on those who don't want it. It's the main thing that differentiates the consoles because Microsoft made their console that way on purpose.
As an owner of the 360 for seven years and as a subscriber of gold for that entire time, I feel for this reason alone, my disliking (hate is too strong of a word) of Microsoft is perfectly justified.
Your logic is flawed. Millions of Playstation gamers have not found the value of PS+. If they didn't want to subscribe with all the free games, how is forcing them to subscribe in order to play online something they won't mind? We all received a free 30 day subscription when we were forced to opt out of the class action lawsuit if we wanted to continue playing online with the PS3. You can't say it is just a matter of finding out what plus offers.
If Kinect is optional, then PS4 owners win. Kinect is what makes the XboxOne different from the PS4. It almost seems like they are scared the way they want it removed. Xbox owners don't know what Kinect will do yet, to say they don't want it is foolish. Many are looking forward to see how it will be integrated into the gaming experience. The one thing we do know is if it is "optional" like the PSEye or Move, it will be useless.
No offense to you, but what you just said is like comparing apples to oranges! Here's why! Suppose both consoles were on equal ground, and all that was being compared was functionality! No camera, no ram, no graphics! Now being that we live in a social age, try comparing those features between the PS4 & Xbox 1, and it's pretty obvious which one would come out on top!
Facebook PS4, no paid subscription to use! Xbox 1, paid subscription required to use!
Netflix PS4, no paid subscription required to use! Xbox 1, paid subscription required to use!
MLB PS4, no paid subscription required to use! NFL Xbox 1, paid subscription required to use!
Online multiplayer, PS4, paid subscription required to use! Online multiplayer, Xbox 1, paid subscription required to use!
There are a lot more examples that could be listed, and sure there are those who would say that these examples are not reasonable enough to deter people from purchasing the Xbox 1, but I'm 100% sure that there are those who beg to differ.
You say Microsoft have gone a long way to rectify their mistakes!? Here's one, how about they never made the mistakes to begin with!? No one with a straight face could say that Microsoft didn't know that their direction this coming gen wasn't going to rattle some cages! But the truth is, Microsoft never thought that they were going the direction alone!!!! As a Sony supporter, I do believe Sony had plans to go a similar route, it's just that after Microsoft unveiling they saw what type of reception it would get.
The PS3 and supporters endured some of the worst and degrading fanboy hate imaginable, even now Nintendo is enduring it! Now Microsoft is getting a taste of if it! What makes them so special ?????
In terms of value, PS+ is definitely superior. However, the dedicated server support is a VERY BIG factor for gamers like me. But you're talking hypothetically. The X1, as a whole package makes Xbox Live justifiable and the paywall less of an issue.
"You say Microsoft have gone a long way to rectify their mistakes!? Here's one, how about they never made the mistakes to begin with!?"
Well, that's the beauty of hindsight though isn't it? They deserve to get criticised for the mistakes that they made not for the constant over-reaction that is affecting the console to this day as if DRM still exists and that the power brick shown during the Xbox unboxing spells Armageddon for the gaming world.
"The PS3 and supporters endured some of the worst and degrading fanboy hate imaginable, even now Nintendo is enduring it! Now Microsoft is getting a taste of if it! What makes them so special ?"
Lol @ "some of the worst and degrading fanboy hate imaginable". Exaggerating things aside, I don't think any of the companies had it as bad as MS have it now. But fair criticism is one thing; fan boys enhancing their agendas by blowing things out of proportion and acting like immature kids, downvoting videos etc is hardly productive is it?
The Xbox One is still a very promising bit of kit. The games are brilliant on it, regardless of how hard desperately fanboys tried to play them down.
"Millions of Playstation gamers have not found the value of PS+. If they didn't want to subscribe with all the free games, how is forcing them to subscribe in order to play online something they won't mind?"
This this this this this. Nobody can argue that PS+ isn't a great value. You get free game, discounts, exclusive content etc. However, and this is something that many people on N4G will never want to see, not everyone wants it.
Some people just want to play Killzone or COD or Madden online. For their own reasons, they chose PS3 as their console to play online, which is perfectly fine. And they do not have to pay a fee to do so. If they want PS+, they can buy it and enjoy all of the benefits.
But with PS4, those same people who just want to pay online and do not want to pay a fee to do so no longer have a choice. The added benefits of a PS+ membership are nice, but at the end of the day, they still have to pay for something that they didn't have to before, regardless of bonuses that come with that fee.
As a multiconsole owner, I can't say that I'm thrilled with this. I've played for LIVE willingly since the original Xbox, and I appreciated that I did not have to pay another fee for Sony consoles. With PS4, I will have to. It's not a big cost in the grand scheme of things, but it is still an additional cost for me.
So the fanboy hate was a figment of my imagination? That's actually quite funny! As far as dedicated servers go, I didn't know Microsoft were the only ones offering this option! Oh, because they're not! Dedicated server have been offered through Sony for a nice while now, how do you think a game like DCO is playable on the PS3? All in all your preference is your preference, but to think Microsoft didn't call this shiztstorm down on themselves is just unbelievable gullible! And oh yeah! Wasn't it the Microsoft cronies blaring their horns from the rooftops when the PS3 and Sony were getting lambasted by the media, fanboys, even Sony own supporters, but oh how quick some are to forget, until that scrutiny is turned on them, or something they support.
Your logic is flawed because your using the same stupid argument to defend Kinect
"It would then be a PS4" or "Kinect is what makes the Xbox One different from the PS4"
HOW...just HOW
They are two completely different consoles, even if Xbox One allowed you to have a choice with Kinect how would it be a PS4. The PS4 can't have things like Halo, Gears, Forza, Fable, Alan Wake, Quantum Break, Killer Instinct. So because of these games and other things which keep the two separate they will always be two different consoles.
Seriously it's the worst excuse to defend Kinect. The 360 didn't have an identity problem with Kinect being separate so the Xbox One shouldn't. Stop trying to give off silly excuses like that for people who want an Xbox One but have a problem with Kinect
Since so many people used this argument and I will turn it around:
"if PS+ is such a great value of it's own without the online play part, why isn't it offered separately? Why do Sony have to bundle the two? It is hardly consumer friendly, considering it used to be free and is free on many platforms."
Fact of the matter is, Sony like any other company is trying to make you pay for a feature that was free, and is currently free on other consoles and PC.
@Mr Pinky of course they will have different games but essentially their out of the box capabilities would be pretty much the same, but lets be real despite your trolling you already knew that.
As a longtime xbox fan I don't want just another ps4-like Xbox, I mean even now both are still very similar but X1 could have been for better or worst very different than ps4 depending on your point of view.
At least Kinect makes them somewhat different in approach, as I said before I'd rather micro sell 60 mil vs 70 mil over the next 5yrs than buy a Kinect-less-X1 if I did guess what I could buy a pc, ps4, wii or whatever floats my boat. Because if that was the case and I COULD buy Kinect separately only for it to receive similar support as ps eye/move, the experience obviously wont be the same. If Kinect means some don't buy X1 thats fine, why?...because I'm a gamer looking for new gaming experiences to go along with a wealth of traditional gaming experiences not a shareholder only concerned with how much money they make.
I'm personally not getting PSN+ for multiplayer, because I rarely play it and wouldn't bother spending money for just multiplayer.
I'm getting PSN+ for the same reason I do now. I like getting "free" games to play. The value is there.
I think it's a sucky move by Sony however. PSN+ sold itself really. But since I would have been a member for the foreseeable future anyways, I'll give them the benefit of the doubt that they MAY deliver something even more worthwhile service wise.
I guess a more important question would be, if MS is so confident that people will pay for the service for the online, why put everything else behind the pay wall?
I'll answer that for you. It's a revenue stream. Plain and simple. They know that people become connected to those services, and will be willing to pay for them. Not unlike PSN+ and it's free games. MS offers very little in the way of it's own content from what I've seen, unlike PSN+. Instead they give it value to those that may not care about MP, and hide commonly free features behind a cash grab.
To me that is the discernible difference between PSN+ and XBLive. One offers it's own unique and valuable content, whereas the other offers other people content which is free everywhere else.
I can only speak for myself of course. If people don't care for the extra content and discounts that PSN+ offers, then I can certainly understand why they would be miffed to have to pay online. Which is why I said it's a sucky move by Sony. But MS showed that people will pay for MP, so why would Sony as a business ignore that revenue stream? At the very least though, I can say that Sony isn't giving PSN+ false value by putting free services behind it.
it doesnt matter if its fair or not what matters is the xbox one sucks and the ps4 is better now you can either join the ps4 or you can stick with the xbox one and be made fun of an become the failure of the gaming society. xbox fanboys dont get mad get ps4 and you will get happy.
The sad thing is that people actually agreed with your drivel. How old are you again??? If you are 12 well then you are forgiven BUT if this BS is coming from a grown ass man you sir are in DIRE need psychological help cause you are all ways of fcked up.
Yeah if you didn't like drm policies or Kinect nothing wrong with voicing your opinion but nitpicking AA batteries, powerbrick, size of console, unboxing by Major Nelson instead of a site, the cloud is useless, etc are just stupid flaming from fanboys nothing more. ...in the end it won't matter once the system is in the hands of gamers, when millions are enjoying the X1 and the benefits of great games, kinect functionality with games/UI, hdmi in, awesome controller, awesome xbl ease of use, Twitch, multiplats with extra options, then it will be the gamers who bought a X1 who get to laugh last.
Don't worry Jokes, N4G feed on these BS things like Ares(the God of War) feeds on Human conflict. It is what keeping this site afloat. How do you think tabloids paper like National Enquirer still remains in business?
At the end of the day, I just shake my head and do my usual comments to bring my point across and have a good laugh. The more disagrees you get on a Xbox only article, then you'll know you are doing something good and make sense. The jokes is on them.
@No_limits u say all this shit about N4G yet u find urself here losing bubbles everyday speaking ur meaningless crap about why is xbox is good i disagree with u because ur full of shit that's all so keep laughing to urself because no one will laugh with you.
The problem with the XB1 isn't JUST one thing. All these things add up. If you had one big flaw and one minor flaw in your work, your boss could live with the minor one if you got rid of the big one.
But if you've got one big flaw and many minor flaws, getting rid of the one big flaw doesn't really do a lot, honestly. In fact, with the big flaw gone, the minor ones will stand out even more.
You guys keep getting upset about people complaining, but it's because people don't find the system good enough yet. It was never JUST the DRM that prevented people from wanting the system; that was just the BIGGEST reason. I'll admit, I didn't expect to have any problems wanting an XB1 once they redacted their stance on the DRM, but they've given plenty of other reasons to do so.
Microsoft just keeps showing itself to be incompetent when it comes to attracting new gamers. They'll keep you and No_Limit(no clue WHY) and others like you, but all this flip-flopping and nickel and diming doesn't do much to instill confidence in non-fans.
For some reason, though, you guys see the dissent and think it's only people nitpicking. You think that others will just accept these things because you do.
What I don't get is: why don't you have a problem with even these "minor" things? If it's anything like what's been going on so far, if people kept complaining enough, the system could come out damn near perfect. Microsoft would keep fixing things until there was nothing left to complain about.
But no. You'd rather people just shut up and put up.
Don't you want the best possible system? I sure as hell do.
If none of that matters...why do you go off on a rant whenever someone talks negatively about it?
You only feed the trolls. It's what they want. Goes for all sides btw. Trolls are not unique to any one console...or anything else on the internet for that matter.
Oh come on. This bloke has been around since the beginning and has earned the right to comment on various issues within the industry. I respect his and Carmack's views as they are from an informed and respected position unlike most throw away comments on this site.
MS fanboy ffs.
On topic - my view:
Backlash deserved?
Yes on the whole. The ideas were too big/ambitious a step to take too quickly and the message was very poorly communicated to the public exacerbating the reaction from the media. Gamers are scared of DRM and MS didn't deal with this in their ideas.
Backlash overdone?
Oh Yes. The armchair warriors, and especially the media have taken it upon themselves to stoke the flames to generate hits and discourse wherever possible. We now have a situation where every little detail is ripped to pieces or blown way out of proportion. The headset and AA battery 'issues' being a prime example. MS got it wrong to begin with but they are making strides to improve the situation in my view. People seem to love having something to bash or moan about. The PS3 was mostly unfairly kicked during its whole life cycle.
I do agree with Hellsv regarding the access to Netflix being behind the gold pay wall. That is really poor.
Can we maybe quit bitching about the Netflix thing, you think??
There is not one person here on this website that buys a 360 just to use Netflix.
I get so sick of reading the same tired complaints over and over, when I know damn good and well that they aren't actually even affecting anyone in this crowd.
Here is why I am assuming it doesn't matter to us, the hardcore crowd.
I have 4 devices right now that I could use to stream Netflix, and it could be 5, but after I moved I never bothered to hook my Wii back up.
My internet connected TV can do it, my TiVo Premiere can do it, and then there is my 360 and PS3. Come the end of the year, that number will go up by 2 when I add a PS4 and an XB1.
My point is, if for whatever reason I decided I didn't want to pay for Live anymore, I wouldn't be hurting for ways to access Netflix. (Which ironically, I don't even use at all because I think their selection is terrible.)
How big of a percentage of Xbox owners do you think meet the following criteria?
1) They own a 360, or in the future, an XB1.
2) They have it connected to the internet.
3) They don't own a single other device that can do Netflix streaming.
4) They don't already Pay for Live in order to play multiplayer.
I would guess that the number people that meet all 4 of those requirements is VERY small, and I bet amongst N4G users, that number is ZERO.
So my point is, why the hell are we still bitching about it, other than to have yet another reason to bitch about MS and how terrible it is that a corporation likes making money, etc, etc...
I get so sick of reading the same crap over and over and over again...
M$ brought this on themselves with all their BS and bad messaging and 180s. I just hope they learn their lesson, and maybe the One will be a decent console.
Theme Park, Hi-Octane and Syndicate Wars were all released on ps1 Hammad. Quite a while ago I know, but the guy has been making games for a long time. Longer than the time many gamers on this site have been alive.
Sorry Molyneux, But MS brought this on themselves. They even had chances to clear this up and not let it escalate by doing the post E3 roundtables, but they ran with their tails tucked between their legs.
We all know Molyneux is a MS fanboy, he defends everything they do
Having to pay to get access to Netflix is not a good thing, having a camera forced upon you upping the price by $100 is not a good thing
I understand why some gamers are pissed off
I think peter wants a job at M$..thats why he is too defensive or maybe he is entitled to release a game for XB1
Sorry Molyneux, But MS brought this on themselves. They even had chances to clear this up and not let it escalate by doing the post E3 roundtables, but they ran with their tails tucked between their legs.