Excerpt:
"Whether you play Halo, Uncharted, Killzone, Call of Duty, or Gears of War online – you have seen a message regarding your NAT (Network Address Translation) and how it may be “Moderate”, “Strict”, or simply “Not Open”. The NAT is what determines the communication between you and other players.
There are three settings most games will let you be aware of (or during testing):
Open (best) | Moderate (okay) | Strict (bad)"
Where are you on the battleground of console wars? Should we care? Do you care?
"No doubt, if Microsoft or Sony or Nintendo wants to pay me to advocate for their products day in and day out, I promise to never touch a competitor’s product ever again. But most of us are normal people, and most of us should ignore people who have an agenda that is either self-serving, in the interests of some soulless corporation, or both."
So...
Ignore corporate shills!
(Microsoft, Sony, or Nintendo.....please make me your corporate shill)
My theory on gaming "fans" on the internet:
30% are shills.
30% are children.
30% have a legitimate mental health diagnosis.
10% are normal adults with personal likes and dislikes.
The 4th group are nice to find. The third group are easily ignored. The second group are excused. That first group are my reminder that none of these corporations are In this business for some misguided altruistic cause.
Straight up: I used to buy all consoles. Even Xbox. Still have the first one. I have nothing against gamers or their game preferences of genres. Just blind support and spending that hurts the console industry I play in that effects me or will effect me. Like paying for online when I knew it was coming for everyone and stated that years ago on N4G during PS3 days. Those multiple comments are back there somewhere.
The war is about supported strategies of a company that may not have your best interests and I'll always rally against it. If that's fanboyism or continuing a console war, I'll keep doing it.
I don't support EA and all their machinations. I've boycotted their games for over a decade. I want competition like NFL 2K. I'm not going to buy Madden just because. And I believe 2k was better at putting things in the game over EA's lies of "its in the game." Why support a company like EA when you know they have ulterior motives?
Microsoft. Why would I support a company that has near a trillion dollars but doesn't make games like Sony does? Why support their ideas of services and fleecing gamers wallets with new schemes? DRM2013 was their attempt to control our gaming habits like Stadia will do which is no trading, lending or owning games. Why support their lies and misleading statements that we all know they're guilty of? Crackdown being their last recent example.
It's not about war. It's about where you want gaming to go. And what companies are doing their best to support gamers and gaming's future while making money. Sony has time and time again, showed they care about games and growing the industry. Not controlling it. With companies trying to destroy traditional gaming with mobile style micro transactions, season passes, loot boxes, etc, and now GaaS and lack of ownership, the war continues. I'm not sorry for who I support when I can clearly see Sony being better at offering options like VR while still making money. And still being friendly. If you're against that, I'm against you. If Sony ever changes, I'll be against them.
Tell that to the fallen... 3DO, Phillip's, Casio, Atari, Sega. Next up Google and amazon
Console wars began because as a kid your parents could only afford to buy you one system. You had a chose to make between two systems. For example NES or SMS. I picked SMS as a kid. Now my main concern was that my system got the best exclusive games and became the most successful. Because if it didn't it would become discontinued and I wouldn't have anymore games to buy for my system. So in school I would defend the SMS and my other friends would defend NES. It became a war of who had the better system. In other words console wars are all about protecting your one investment.
Not exactly for me. When I was younger, we played all the systems and went to each other's houses to play them.
I got a Sega Master System after an NES because Zillion reminded me of Macross/Robotech and Phantasy Star looked cool and different than Nintendo RPGs. And I continued to support Sega because of the nonsense 3rd party policies and strong arming Nintendo tried with NES. I still had an NES and a SNES. But Nintendo lost points for the way they acted and I had no problem of them losing their grip on the industry with Sony releasing PS1.
I didn't get into the which was better. Because games were subjective. I got into which developers and companies did better for gamers and which companies were just into cash grabs. And to avoid them. Basically inform others on being better shoppers because there were games like from LJN that were garbage. The industry didn't need more garbage or a sequel of the video game crash that was filled with garbage. Seen my share on Atari .
The biggest complaint most gamers have had with Xbox, also including times before the Xbox One, was its lack of exclusives in comparison to Nintendo and Sony. This is something that has become more and more of a problem over the continued lifespan of the Xbox One.
2017 is the year of new IP on Xbox One? Sea of thieves and what else?
Xbox One is cheaper than PS4? Depends on the region, I guess. Still same $299 base price in the US for both.
Either way, the lost ground is just lost. MS would have to do some extreme stuff to top PS4. None of the stuff mentioned in the piece is enough.
pretty sure the article talks about regaining lost ground (ie closing the gap), not surpassing the PS4.
Equally daunting task that would require Xbox domination for months and months. As I said, it would require extreme measures and nothing mentioned in the article would suffice.
No way will it ever catch ps4. It's far too late. Gotta wait until next gen, and if they don't start pumping out new ips the next gen is a loss as well
What is the point of articles like this ? i see them everyday on here. Microsoft can't realistically do anything now to gain ground on Sony, it's just not going to happen no matter how much they try. The Playstation brand is just too big, it's been this way since the PS1.
PC like experience on PS4 – Sony’s attempt to address cross platform gaming
A DMZ isn't ideal.
Even with a DMZ you might need to port forward to get everything working properly (I had to, as on the BThomehub it specifically states that you still need to port forward to get the best result).
Also, a DMZ can be a security risk. If you're leaving your PS3/360 exposed, that's cool, but now if you're leaving it exposed with open connections to the rest of your network - such as, via windows media servers. Then that could pose a security risk for your whole network.
Port forwarding is safer, better.
how do i DMZ my ps3? i have a Thomson modem v8 and i have tried several times to set it up but i can't :(
DMZ means outside the firewall, hence all ports are open. This is ideal for video game consoles. I have been doing this for 6 years without problems.
Lol DMZ do not work all tha time.I have open up all my ports and I STILL cant last more then 3-4 minutes on BC2.I have done everything EA have asked and their game still dont work.My connection works great with all my other games.
Only when I try to play BC2 is when my internet stops working.So after 2 weeks of trying too play online.I'm finally taking Bc2;UE back too gamestop and pre-order UnCharted 3.I was looking forward too Battlefield 3 but it looks like tha only shooter I'm getting later this year will be UC3.
EA and DICE really spit in tha face of one of their customers and I have learned my lesson.Neva believe tha hype bc you will be letdown just like I was....