The "Sony Games" forum, which includes Retro Game Reviews, has been archived and is now read-only. You cannot post here or create a new thread or review on this forum.
With today's announcement of the XBox One we now know all of the contenders in the next generation of the console wars!!!1 In the red corner we have the latest iteration of Sony's gaming powerhouse, the Playstation 4. Nothing original with the name, but why change a winning formula?
In the blue corner (or should that be green) we have the XBox One. Will people think that it is 360 times more inferior that the XBox 360? Will they compare it to the PSOne? Is their naming convention too confusing for anyone to truly follow?
And in the brown corner is the Wii U. At least they're sticking to what they know. Stick with the Wii name, because that works. And why not stick with the same policy of not backing it at launch with enough games either, amIright? Then, when the games do come, they're the same games we already played. When did Nintendo release an original game? I'm thinking GameCube era. No doubt when the games do come along they will be good, but the way Nintendo are likely to drip-feed them through there won't be enough to keep people interested. The tablet is neat, but so far no one is doing anything interesting with it.
I think the Wii U could put Nintendo in some serious trouble, but they'll always make money from their games - but could we one day see a day when Nintendo release games on another platform?
So it will be left to the big boys to duke it out. Punches will be thrown. Blows will be landed. At the end of the day many of the big games will be multi-platform, but there will be some exclusives. If you can't call it from the exclusives and you're looking at what else it can do, well frankly I'd go for the Sony kit. It looks better. It won't make you pay for Kinect you might not even want, and, at the end of the day, it looks better.
So! Who will you back in the next generation!?
In the blue corner (or should that be green) we have the XBox One. Will people think that it is 360 times more inferior that the XBox 360? Will they compare it to the PSOne? Is their naming convention too confusing for anyone to truly follow?
And in the brown corner is the Wii U. At least they're sticking to what they know. Stick with the Wii name, because that works. And why not stick with the same policy of not backing it at launch with enough games either, amIright? Then, when the games do come, they're the same games we already played. When did Nintendo release an original game? I'm thinking GameCube era. No doubt when the games do come along they will be good, but the way Nintendo are likely to drip-feed them through there won't be enough to keep people interested. The tablet is neat, but so far no one is doing anything interesting with it.
I think the Wii U could put Nintendo in some serious trouble, but they'll always make money from their games - but could we one day see a day when Nintendo release games on another platform?
So it will be left to the big boys to duke it out. Punches will be thrown. Blows will be landed. At the end of the day many of the big games will be multi-platform, but there will be some exclusives. If you can't call it from the exclusives and you're looking at what else it can do, well frankly I'd go for the Sony kit. It looks better. It won't make you pay for Kinect you might not even want, and, at the end of the day, it looks better.
So! Who will you back in the next generation!?
Page:
pb wrote:
Steambox is an attempt to bridge this gap between a standard spec machine that can run anything with a label on it (if they get publishers to agree to add a 'works on Steambox' label and the PC's huge library of titles. Given the small form factor it would need to take, I'm not sure it will have any upgrade options.
Is this just another attempt to 'simplify' a PC?
pb ... it's not rocket science, but the way that you suggest that 'the populous' view it ... it is!
Steambox is an attempt to bridge this gap between a standard spec machine that can run anything with a label on it (if they get publishers to agree to add a 'works on Steambox' label and the PC's huge library of titles. Given the small form factor it would need to take, I'm not sure it will have any upgrade options.
Is this just another attempt to 'simplify' a PC?
pb ... it's not rocket science, but the way that you suggest that 'the populous' view it ... it is!
pb wrote:
In no way at all was I being anti PC, or are all my years playing on an 286, 386 etc just a figment of my imagination?
I'm afraid you are and you've forgotten your 'roots'! You've moved on to the 'simple' solution ... fair enough ;¬)
In no way at all was I being anti PC, or are all my years playing on an 286, 386 etc just a figment of my imagination?
I'm afraid you are and you've forgotten your 'roots'! You've moved on to the 'simple' solution ... fair enough ;¬)
chasfh wrote:
pb wrote:
[i]Sorry but 'stick it in the Xbox, Xbox360, etc etc etc' just like 'stick it in the DVD player, Blu-Ray player, whatever the newist thing is' ... anti PC gaming
In the same way that watching a BBC 1 is being anti ITV I suppose. In no way at all was I being anti PC, or are all my years playing on an 286, 386 etc just a figment of my imagination?
I'm not being anti-PC, I'm suggesting that a single branded box is easier for the general public to deal with than a box with lots of branded parts put together.
The nearest equivalent I can think of is a mini system compared to HiFi Separates. The separates will always sound better, but the public go for the single box solutions because of their appeal as instantly usable devices.
Now using that analogy, you could argue that HiFi separates are just as easy to put together, but many people will still be put off by this idea and want something that is instant and presented as a single solution to a simple task, playing their music.
Okay, let's go with the hifi analogy.
Just as you can buy a hifi unit or hifi separates, you can buy a pc "unit" (pre-built) or a pc in bits (separates).
Just as either hifi option will play music perfectly well, either pc option will play games perfectly well.
Just as separates will work better, building your own pc will work better.
Just as some people will be put off by hifi separates, some will be put off by pc "separates" and want a single solution to a simple task, playing their games (a pc "unit").
So where's the "complication" with a pc "unit" compared to an xbox?[/i]
Even buying a ready made PC is like buying Separates but buying them in a single package. You have to have some knowledge of how they all work together, the same way that you still have to have knowledge that buying a PC game will require a certain level of CPU, Graphics Card and OS.
I understand your point, that it's not overly complicated to work out the minimum specs (though CPUs tend to complicate things over generations and certainly where AMD is concerned) but it's back to the point of which is the easiest to work out and therefore the one that people who are less tech savvy will aim for.
Steambox is an attempt to bridge this gap between a standard spec machine that can run anything with a label on it (if they get publishers to agree to add a 'works on Steambox' label and the PC's huge library of titles. Given the small form factor it would need to take, I'm not sure it will have any upgrade options.
pb wrote:
[i]Sorry but 'stick it in the Xbox, Xbox360, etc etc etc' just like 'stick it in the DVD player, Blu-Ray player, whatever the newist thing is' ... anti PC gaming
In the same way that watching a BBC 1 is being anti ITV I suppose. In no way at all was I being anti PC, or are all my years playing on an 286, 386 etc just a figment of my imagination?
I'm not being anti-PC, I'm suggesting that a single branded box is easier for the general public to deal with than a box with lots of branded parts put together.
The nearest equivalent I can think of is a mini system compared to HiFi Separates. The separates will always sound better, but the public go for the single box solutions because of their appeal as instantly usable devices.
Now using that analogy, you could argue that HiFi separates are just as easy to put together, but many people will still be put off by this idea and want something that is instant and presented as a single solution to a simple task, playing their music.
Okay, let's go with the hifi analogy.
Just as you can buy a hifi unit or hifi separates, you can buy a pc "unit" (pre-built) or a pc in bits (separates).
Just as either hifi option will play music perfectly well, either pc option will play games perfectly well.
Just as separates will work better, building your own pc will work better.
Just as some people will be put off by hifi separates, some will be put off by pc "separates" and want a single solution to a simple task, playing their games (a pc "unit").
So where's the "complication" with a pc "unit" compared to an xbox?[/i]
Even buying a ready made PC is like buying Separates but buying them in a single package. You have to have some knowledge of how they all work together, the same way that you still have to have knowledge that buying a PC game will require a certain level of CPU, Graphics Card and OS.
I understand your point, that it's not overly complicated to work out the minimum specs (though CPUs tend to complicate things over generations and certainly where AMD is concerned) but it's back to the point of which is the easiest to work out and therefore the one that people who are less tech savvy will aim for.
Steambox is an attempt to bridge this gap between a standard spec machine that can run anything with a label on it (if they get publishers to agree to add a 'works on Steambox' label and the PC's huge library of titles. Given the small form factor it would need to take, I'm not sure it will have any upgrade options.
pb wrote:
Sorry but 'stick it in the Xbox, Xbox360, etc etc etc' just like 'stick it in the DVD player, Blu-Ray player, whatever the newist thing is' ... anti PC gaming
In the same way that watching a BBC 1 is being anti ITV I suppose. In no way at all was I being anti PC, or are all my years playing on an 286, 386 etc just a figment of my imagination?
I'm not being anti-PC, I'm suggesting that a single branded box is easier for the general public to deal with than a box with lots of branded parts put together.
The nearest equivalent I can think of is a mini system compared to HiFi Separates. The separates will always sound better, but the public go for the single box solutions because of their appeal as instantly usable devices.
Now using that analogy, you could argue that HiFi separates are just as easy to put together, but many people will still be put off by this idea and want something that is instant and presented as a single solution to a simple task, playing their music.
Okay, let's go with the hifi analogy.
Just as you can buy a hifi unit or hifi separates, you can buy a pc "unit" (pre-built) or a pc in bits (separates).
Just as either hifi option will play music perfectly well, either pc option will play games perfectly well.
Just as separates will work better, building your own pc will work better.
Just as some people will be put off by hifi separates, some will be put off by pc "separates" and want a single solution to a simple task, playing their games (a pc "unit").
So where's the "complication" with a pc "unit" compared to an xbox?
Sorry but 'stick it in the Xbox, Xbox360, etc etc etc' just like 'stick it in the DVD player, Blu-Ray player, whatever the newist thing is' ... anti PC gaming
In the same way that watching a BBC 1 is being anti ITV I suppose. In no way at all was I being anti PC, or are all my years playing on an 286, 386 etc just a figment of my imagination?
I'm not being anti-PC, I'm suggesting that a single branded box is easier for the general public to deal with than a box with lots of branded parts put together.
The nearest equivalent I can think of is a mini system compared to HiFi Separates. The separates will always sound better, but the public go for the single box solutions because of their appeal as instantly usable devices.
Now using that analogy, you could argue that HiFi separates are just as easy to put together, but many people will still be put off by this idea and want something that is instant and presented as a single solution to a simple task, playing their music.
Okay, let's go with the hifi analogy.
Just as you can buy a hifi unit or hifi separates, you can buy a pc "unit" (pre-built) or a pc in bits (separates).
Just as either hifi option will play music perfectly well, either pc option will play games perfectly well.
Just as separates will work better, building your own pc will work better.
Just as some people will be put off by hifi separates, some will be put off by pc "separates" and want a single solution to a simple task, playing their games (a pc "unit").
So where's the "complication" with a pc "unit" compared to an xbox?
Sorry but 'stick it in the Xbox, Xbox360, etc etc etc' just like 'stick it in the DVD player, Blu-Ray player, whatever the newist thing is' ... anti PC gaming
In the same way that watching a BBC 1 is being anti ITV I suppose. In no way at all was I being anti PC, or are all my years playing on an 286, 386 etc just a figment of my imagination?
I'm not being anti-PC, I'm suggesting that a single branded box is easier for the general public to deal with than a box with lots of branded parts put together.
The nearest equivalent I can think of is a mini system compared to HiFi Separates. The separates will always sound better, but the public go for the single box solutions because of their appeal as instantly usable devices.
Now using that analogy, you could argue that HiFi separates are just as easy to put together, but many people will still be put off by this idea and want something that is instant and presented as a single solution to a simple task, playing their music.
In the same way that watching a BBC 1 is being anti ITV I suppose. In no way at all was I being anti PC, or are all my years playing on an 286, 386 etc just a figment of my imagination?
I'm not being anti-PC, I'm suggesting that a single branded box is easier for the general public to deal with than a box with lots of branded parts put together.
The nearest equivalent I can think of is a mini system compared to HiFi Separates. The separates will always sound better, but the public go for the single box solutions because of their appeal as instantly usable devices.
Now using that analogy, you could argue that HiFi separates are just as easy to put together, but many people will still be put off by this idea and want something that is instant and presented as a single solution to a simple task, playing their music.
This ... and I apologise pb ... is a 'load of b*ll*cks' ....
"If you own a PC you need to know whether your graphics card is more or less powerful than certain benchmark cards, how much memory you have and your CPU speed and how that correlates to other different CPUs (is a Dual Core 2 CPU running at a certain speed the same as a Dual Core i3 running at the same speed?)"
As chas has said ...
and as I have said ...
and as Davidm4 has just said! (His card is even a lower spec than mine!)
Sorry but 'stick it in the Xbox, Xbox360, etc etc etc' just like 'stick it in the DVD player, Blu-Ray player, whatever the newist thing is' ... anti PC gaming
@chas ... maybe 'a graphic card naming' explanation is in order ... ie
Davidm4 runs a 8700GT card which was series 8, and 700 means it's above a mid-range card like the 8500 but below a 8900, but the GT just means it had added 'cores' etc!
My card, a 9800GTX+ is the top of the 9 series, as was, which is now at the bottom of the Nvidia GPU list as we've moved into Direct X11 and the 10 series effectively.
"If you own a PC you need to know whether your graphics card is more or less powerful than certain benchmark cards, how much memory you have and your CPU speed and how that correlates to other different CPUs (is a Dual Core 2 CPU running at a certain speed the same as a Dual Core i3 running at the same speed?)"
As chas has said ...
and as I have said ...
and as Davidm4 has just said! (His card is even a lower spec than mine!)
Sorry but 'stick it in the Xbox, Xbox360, etc etc etc' just like 'stick it in the DVD player, Blu-Ray player, whatever the newist thing is' ... anti PC gaming
@chas ... maybe 'a graphic card naming' explanation is in order ... ie
Davidm4 runs a 8700GT card which was series 8, and 700 means it's above a mid-range card like the 8500 but below a 8900, but the GT just means it had added 'cores' etc!
My card, a 9800GTX+ is the top of the 9 series, as was, which is now at the bottom of the Nvidia GPU list as we've moved into Direct X11 and the 10 series effectively.
chasfh wrote:
Err... really? You really think it's that critical that my previous statement of "pretty much any decent pc" can play most modern games is incorrect? Really?
It always surprises me when I read the minimum specs for latest games to find 8600GT, a mid range card in 2007. Not that I know anything about specs, I paid for mine to be built.
Err... really? You really think it's that critical that my previous statement of "pretty much any decent pc" can play most modern games is incorrect? Really?
It always surprises me when I read the minimum specs for latest games to find 8600GT, a mid range card in 2007. Not that I know anything about specs, I paid for mine to be built.
"Reading several words instead of one" isn't what you need to do, is it?
That's EXACTLY what you need to do... Unless you include turning the box over..
Graphics Cards are branded but even then you have lots of different cards inside a brand.
...such as HD7850 and HD5450...
Except those are distinctly different cards, and the naming convention is followed through the entire range, and the minimum required is shown on the games...
An Xbox 360 is a device that will play all games branded with that device name.
...And a game that will play on any card above an HD5450 is a game that will play on any card above an HD5450...
Xbox and Xbox 360 are two separate devices (note the 360 at the end, this is actually another part of the name of the console and is not invisible).
...As are NVidia Geforce GTX480 and NVidia Geforce GTX550Ti (note the GTXnumber is, likewise, not invisible).
trying to work out if your graphics card is below or above that.
Err... really? You really think it's that critical that my previous statement of "pretty much any decent pc" can play most modern games is incorrect? Really?
..And the convention of "higher number means more powerful/ capable" that seems to have been adopted by both major parties wouldn't help I suppose?
If you're one of the millions of mothers buying a game for your son or daughter, it would be bewildering.
...no more so than what console their son/ daughter/ nephew etc. owned seemed to be to many that I dealt with.
That's EXACTLY what you need to do... Unless you include turning the box over..
Graphics Cards are branded but even then you have lots of different cards inside a brand.
...such as HD7850 and HD5450...
Except those are distinctly different cards, and the naming convention is followed through the entire range, and the minimum required is shown on the games...
An Xbox 360 is a device that will play all games branded with that device name.
...And a game that will play on any card above an HD5450 is a game that will play on any card above an HD5450...
Xbox and Xbox 360 are two separate devices (note the 360 at the end, this is actually another part of the name of the console and is not invisible).
...As are NVidia Geforce GTX480 and NVidia Geforce GTX550Ti (note the GTXnumber is, likewise, not invisible).
trying to work out if your graphics card is below or above that.
Err... really? You really think it's that critical that my previous statement of "pretty much any decent pc" can play most modern games is incorrect? Really?
..And the convention of "higher number means more powerful/ capable" that seems to have been adopted by both major parties wouldn't help I suppose?
If you're one of the millions of mothers buying a game for your son or daughter, it would be bewildering.
...no more so than what console their son/ daughter/ nephew etc. owned seemed to be to many that I dealt with.
chasfh wrote:
[I]The PS3 and Xbox are not one thing. They are different branded items. PCs do not work this way.
"PC" is NOT a branded item. Graphics cards, processors, memory , all of these are. The important one here is graphics card, generally "branded" by chipset, which actually makes it quite straightforward. Not sure how this is relevant. Besides, as I said, console gamers pick their console base on the "specs" or features that suit them; no different than going out to buy a PC that does x,y and z.
You've mentioned already that PCs should not be a single specification and consoles ARE a single specification for that console. Even PCs from different manufacturers have different specifications, so you can't even use this label.
Those PC's have different model names; by your logic, you should be able to play 360 games on an original xbox (both are Microsoft, both are branded "Xbox").
Not sure how this is really relevant either. See my first point.
Other than the core gamers, a significant amount of the world's population who currently play games would not bother to play those same games on a PC because of price, complicated stats and having to place their PC in a living room and connect it to an HDMI TV.
HDMI is not necessary for PC connectivity, even though it is commonly utilised on most modern hardware. I used to connect a pc using a scart cable, and then I moved on to RGB cables. I have also used VGA cables for this purpose, as well as s-video.. in fact any standard video connection. Pretty darned compatible actually, much like the 360 has various cable options available, which you would need to match to your TV sockets...
Price, as already established, is a moot point; you spend what you will, upgrade when you feel you need to and the games on the whole are considerably cheaper. And, by your argument, "core gamers" being your "core market", those people WOULD bother?
And the argument that reading several words instead of one (PC requirements as opposed to the number "360") seems a little...short-sighted? I mean no offence, I just simply do not believe that all console gamers are unwilling to go to the lengths of reading a few more words for the sake of their hobby.
Incidentally, I never compared COD to Minesweeper. DL had already adequately made the point that most decent modern PC's were capable of handling the majority of current games. He's using a six-year-old graphics card to play, for example.[/i]
Graphics Cards are branded but even then you have lots of different cards inside a brand. An Xbox 360 is a device that will play all games branded with that device name. Xbox and Xbox 360 are two separate devices (note the 360 at the end, this is actually another part of the name of the console and is not invisible).
"Reading several words instead of one" isn't what you need to do, is it? Reading Xbox 360 on a game case is not the same as reading the minimum spec on the back of a PC game box and then trying to work out if your graphics card is below or above that. If you're one of the millions of mothers buying a game for your son or daughter, it would be bewildering.
[I]The PS3 and Xbox are not one thing. They are different branded items. PCs do not work this way.
"PC" is NOT a branded item. Graphics cards, processors, memory , all of these are. The important one here is graphics card, generally "branded" by chipset, which actually makes it quite straightforward. Not sure how this is relevant. Besides, as I said, console gamers pick their console base on the "specs" or features that suit them; no different than going out to buy a PC that does x,y and z.
You've mentioned already that PCs should not be a single specification and consoles ARE a single specification for that console. Even PCs from different manufacturers have different specifications, so you can't even use this label.
Those PC's have different model names; by your logic, you should be able to play 360 games on an original xbox (both are Microsoft, both are branded "Xbox").
Not sure how this is really relevant either. See my first point.
Other than the core gamers, a significant amount of the world's population who currently play games would not bother to play those same games on a PC because of price, complicated stats and having to place their PC in a living room and connect it to an HDMI TV.
HDMI is not necessary for PC connectivity, even though it is commonly utilised on most modern hardware. I used to connect a pc using a scart cable, and then I moved on to RGB cables. I have also used VGA cables for this purpose, as well as s-video.. in fact any standard video connection. Pretty darned compatible actually, much like the 360 has various cable options available, which you would need to match to your TV sockets...
Price, as already established, is a moot point; you spend what you will, upgrade when you feel you need to and the games on the whole are considerably cheaper. And, by your argument, "core gamers" being your "core market", those people WOULD bother?
And the argument that reading several words instead of one (PC requirements as opposed to the number "360") seems a little...short-sighted? I mean no offence, I just simply do not believe that all console gamers are unwilling to go to the lengths of reading a few more words for the sake of their hobby.
Incidentally, I never compared COD to Minesweeper. DL had already adequately made the point that most decent modern PC's were capable of handling the majority of current games. He's using a six-year-old graphics card to play, for example.[/i]
Graphics Cards are branded but even then you have lots of different cards inside a brand. An Xbox 360 is a device that will play all games branded with that device name. Xbox and Xbox 360 are two separate devices (note the 360 at the end, this is actually another part of the name of the console and is not invisible).
"Reading several words instead of one" isn't what you need to do, is it? Reading Xbox 360 on a game case is not the same as reading the minimum spec on the back of a PC game box and then trying to work out if your graphics card is below or above that. If you're one of the millions of mothers buying a game for your son or daughter, it would be bewildering.
The PS3 and Xbox are not one thing. They are different branded items. PCs do not work this way.
"PC" is NOT a branded item. Graphics cards, processors, memory , all of these are. The important one here is graphics card, generally "branded" by chipset, which actually makes it quite straightforward. Not sure how this is relevant. Besides, as I said, console gamers pick their console base on the "specs" or features that suit them; no different than going out to buy a PC that does x,y and z.
You've mentioned already that PCs should not be a single specification and consoles ARE a single specification for that console. Even PCs from different manufacturers have different specifications, so you can't even use this label.
Those PC's have different model names; by your logic, you should be able to play 360 games on an original xbox (both are Microsoft, both are branded "Xbox").
Not sure how this is really relevant either. See my first point.
Other than the core gamers, a significant amount of the world's population who currently play games would not bother to play those same games on a PC because of price, complicated stats and having to place their PC in a living room and connect it to an HDMI TV.
HDMI is not necessary for PC connectivity, even though it is commonly utilised on most modern hardware. I used to connect a pc using a scart cable, and then I moved on to RGB cables. I have also used VGA cables for this purpose, as well as s-video.. in fact any standard video connection. Pretty darned compatible actually, much like the 360 has various cable options available, which you would need to match to your TV sockets...
Price, as already established, is a moot point; you spend what you will, upgrade when you feel you need to and the games on the whole are considerably cheaper. And, by your argument, "core gamers" being your "core market", those people WOULD bother?
And the argument that reading several words instead of one (PC requirements as opposed to the number "360") seems a little...short-sighted? I mean no offence, I just simply do not believe that all console gamers are unwilling to go to the lengths of reading a few more words for the sake of their hobby.
Incidentally, I never compared COD to Minesweeper. DL had already adequately made the point that most decent modern PC's were capable of handling the majority of current games. He's using a six-year-old graphics card to play, for example.
"PC" is NOT a branded item. Graphics cards, processors, memory , all of these are. The important one here is graphics card, generally "branded" by chipset, which actually makes it quite straightforward. Not sure how this is relevant. Besides, as I said, console gamers pick their console base on the "specs" or features that suit them; no different than going out to buy a PC that does x,y and z.
You've mentioned already that PCs should not be a single specification and consoles ARE a single specification for that console. Even PCs from different manufacturers have different specifications, so you can't even use this label.
Those PC's have different model names; by your logic, you should be able to play 360 games on an original xbox (both are Microsoft, both are branded "Xbox").
Not sure how this is really relevant either. See my first point.
Other than the core gamers, a significant amount of the world's population who currently play games would not bother to play those same games on a PC because of price, complicated stats and having to place their PC in a living room and connect it to an HDMI TV.
HDMI is not necessary for PC connectivity, even though it is commonly utilised on most modern hardware. I used to connect a pc using a scart cable, and then I moved on to RGB cables. I have also used VGA cables for this purpose, as well as s-video.. in fact any standard video connection. Pretty darned compatible actually, much like the 360 has various cable options available, which you would need to match to your TV sockets...
Price, as already established, is a moot point; you spend what you will, upgrade when you feel you need to and the games on the whole are considerably cheaper. And, by your argument, "core gamers" being your "core market", those people WOULD bother?
And the argument that reading several words instead of one (PC requirements as opposed to the number "360") seems a little...short-sighted? I mean no offence, I just simply do not believe that all console gamers are unwilling to go to the lengths of reading a few more words for the sake of their hobby.
Incidentally, I never compared COD to Minesweeper. DL had already adequately made the point that most decent modern PC's were capable of handling the majority of current games. He's using a six-year-old graphics card to play, for example.
Page: