Jump to content
Flojomojo

Sony: "new hardware is needed," Microsoft: "Project XCloud"

Recommended Posts

I dragged ass on buying a console this generation... I didn't get a PS4 until the end of 2016, and an Xbox One at the end of 2017. I got a lot of mileage out of the Xbox 360 and PS3, and I intend to do the same with these systems.

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Don't expect the traditional console "experience" to go away anytime soon.

 

Actually the "traditional" console experience went away a generation ago. Now we're all playing on low end locked up PCs giving us the worse of both worlds.

  • Like 5

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Actually the "traditional" console experience went away a generation ago. Now we're all playing on low end locked up PCs giving us the worse of both worlds.

In your head, it did. With the PS4 and Switch, in most cases, I put the media in, and I can play it. Strikes me as particularly similar to previous eras.

Edited by Austin

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

That's how it always goes for me ... hmm, this one has a lot of neat games I want to play, that one has backwards compatibility, and i get all these fun freebies for being a subscriber ... just when I think I'm out

 

giphy.gif

Yeah, I was a bit premature in cutting it off after the 360. Just hadn't realized how much I would need more reliable Xbox hardware later on. But the XB1 will be bought with the goal of being one the end-of-the-line.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

In your head, it did. With the PS4 and Switch, in most cases, I put the media in, and I can play it. Strikes me as particularly similar to previous eras.

 

I was going to say something similar.

 

I think each generation of console hardware i have followed, from the 2600 onwards, there was always something out there that offered more power than the box connected to my TV.

 

Colecovision owning mates games looked and sounded better than my 2600...

 

Friends had PC's at the time i had a Megadrive, then Playstation, then Xbox..etc.

 

I always knew the Arcades and then realms of the PC arena were where you'd find cutting edge hardware.

 

Even with today's console hardware being low end PC technology i have to endure firmware updates, day 1 patches..but i would still rather embrace the simplicity consoles offer..

 

Disc goes in and i am off playing.

Not having to mess about with drivers and configuring my set up beyond invert up/down controls.

 

I think the next generation of hardware is going to embrace streaming as a way forward and that alone will kill it for myself.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

In your head, it did. With the PS4 and Switch, in most cases, I put the media in, and I can play it. Strikes me as particularly similar to previous eras.

 

Really? Often times when I put a game in for the first time I have to sit around while it installs from the media to the harddrive, downloads additional parts (primarily the multiplayer I'm led to believe) from psn, then download the patches which for some games can be in the gigabytes. Then I can sit down and enjoy a gimped game that has had anywhere from 20-500 dollars of content ripped out to sell separately as DLC while I sit and hope the game doesn't randomly crash because the game ends up having bugs in it that aren't yet patched yet.

 

That's of course assuming I can instantly get to the part where I put the disc in the console and can play it without the system stopping me cold and insisting I download a meaty firmware patch with very few to no notes on what it actually does - doesn't matter since it'll insist I install it.

 

If you haven't seen the changes happening to consoles over the last couple of generations I'm afraid you're the one living inside your head.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Really? Often times when I put a game in for the first time I have to sit around while it installs from the media to the harddrive, downloads additional parts (primarily the multiplayer I'm led to believe) from psn, then download the patches which for some games can be in the gigabytes. Then I can sit down and enjoy a gimped game that has had anywhere from 20-500 dollars of content ripped out to sell separately as DLC while I sit and hope the game doesn't randomly crash because the game ends up having bugs in it that aren't yet patched yet.

 

That's of course assuming I can instantly get to the part where I put the disc in the console and can play it without the system stopping me cold and insisting I download a meaty firmware patch with very few to no notes on what it actually does - doesn't matter since it'll insist I install it.

 

If you haven't seen the changes happening to consoles over the last couple of generations I'm afraid you're the one living inside your head.

 

As a classic Xbox owner at the time, Far Cry had to have a patch downloaded to cure a bug which meant you couldn't skip the intro..MS assured console owners patches wouldn't become standard

 

As a PS3 owner. .PSN would download mandatory patches for 3D TV support and Move Support. .they weren't optional and just for those who had the devices in question.

 

My 360 asks me each time i switch it on why it can't seem to connect to the net...

 

Yep, been living with what was once an issue with PC gaming for a number of years now and it's only getting worse.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Have development libraries evolved to the point that backwards compatibility is just assumed for consoles?

 

Xbox and PlayStation should be a platform, not a specific console at this point. And being able to tightly control hardware and the development environment means they could lose all the weirdness that comes with the theoretical backwards compatibility of PCs.

 

That would make me much better with annual or biannual hardware updates/revisions. I'd be able to hold off on buying a new console until I had a TV that needed the extra pixel pushing power or a game that required PS5000 vs my PS4000 came out - and I wouldn't lose access to my existing controllers and games.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

At the very least, there's been zero reason to not re-use controllers over the last few generations. The Xbox and PlayStation controllers have not functionally changed to the extent that they shouldn't be compatible. The fact that they aren't is just a cash grab. I'll give Nintendo a little bit of a pass, since the Wii-U did use Wii controllers and the Switch was a radically different design... but I also think they should have made more use of the GameCube controller that they resurrected.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Bluetooth standards have changed (improved) and PS4/xbone controllers at least work with PCs. I agree with the idea though -- it would be nice to be able to reuse controllers or have a standard used by all so they would complete on quality rather than lock-in.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

At the very least, there's been zero reason to not re-use controllers over the last few generations. The Xbox and PlayStation controllers have not functionally changed to the extent that they shouldn't be compatible. The fact that they aren't is just a cash grab. I'll give Nintendo a little bit of a pass, since the Wii-U did use Wii controllers and the Switch was a radically different design... but I also think they should have made more use of the GameCube controller that they resurrected.

With wireless standards being updated as time moves on, I can understand those not being compatible out of the box. Wired controllers on the other hand I feel like there's no excuse. I'm still a little annoyed at Microsoft for not allowing wired 360 pads to function on the One. This means I had to invest in a newer arcade stick since my 360 ones were not compatible. Being USB and wired, it seems like a basic matter of drivers that could be resolved easily (I mean, it's not like wired 360 accessories don't already work on every Windows OS from XP to 10, that right there seems like a dead giveaway to me that there is some shady business going on).

  • Like 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

wireless marches on but its mostly backwards compatible a BT 1.0 device will negotiate with a 5.0 device and vice versa

 

generic 2.4 ghz bull crap on the other hand has always been a propritary link so good luck, as far as wifi the only real outlier is 802.11A otherwise anything else will play fine on a modern network (though it might bottleneck the entire network doing so) so yea wireless at this point should be an non issue, but it still can be since everyone wants to sell you 5$ controllers for 60 bucks with their own speical dongle (keyboards and mice are this way as well)

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

While I haven't bought next gen consoles when they are new, upon reflection I see that I somehow ended up wih a lot of once-modern consoles! I never intended to get anything post NES...then post SNES...then post PS2, which was still a slim, but in 2005 (for Guitar Hero and retro complilations). Now I have a Wii, a 3DS...Turbografx, Genesis. It comes down to cost in many cases. I'm sure I would enjoy the lost generation of PS3 and all the XBoxes, but only at the right price. With the way things acre going, though, retro gaming will be much, much different. Less nostalgic based, as nothing really goes away anymore. When a universal machine comes along that can play any 'old' games, and subscriptions will be pretty much the only way to play, then the companies will have finally gotten what they want: constant revenue from all demographics by the removal of the secondary market. Basically, the same thing that happened to used DVD and Bluray secondary market once Netflix came to prominance. Not stopping progress, of course, but that's how I see it going down.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

There is a positive side to taking away retailers and "the secondary market," and that is that the people actually developing the games get the money. They can use that money to make more and better games.

 

Honestly, technology is going to change in ways you don't like. I'm just going to sit back and wait to see if I like after it matures a little and then decide what I will buy. Usually consoles drop in price and end up offering you a cutting edge gaming experience for a lower price than a high end gaming PC. Developers develop for their tech level, so you don't have to worry about the new game in that series you love working. I predict that the next gen will eventually offer me something I want at a price too good to pass up, and so I'll step in when I'm ready.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm really torn about gaming both present and future. On one hand I'm pretty fed up with the modern distribution methods for games. Almost every modern game I'd like to play does come on physical media but requires an update patch to be downloaded right away for it to not be a glitchy buggy mess, which means in 10 years or less when the servers for those update patches no longer exist the games of this generation will be barely playable.

 

Even the Nintendo Switch with it's cartridge based games can't escape this practice. I was all excited for Starlink: Battle for Atlas until I found out the other day that even if you buy the game on a cartridge you still have to download a 6GB patch to play it. The only current system that still has it's games self contained on cartridges without any patches to download (in 99% of cases at least) is the 3DS.

 

And yet, I still get really excited over new games that look like fun when I see trailers and previews for them. The aforementioned Starlink, Doom Eternal, the Resident Evil 2 remake, and so on. I really want to play quite a few new games and I'm sure there will be a lot more games in console generations to come that I'll want to play, I just can't seem to make up my mind whether or not it's worth saving up and buying a system to play them on when the models that publishers use to distribute the games are so abhorrent.

 

I'll probably cave in and get a Switch some day once Nintendo has released a revision that addresses some of the common hardware issues with the system (casing cracking from overheating, left JoyCon analog stick drifting, etc.) but I still won't be happy about how the software is distributed.

Edited by Jin

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

There is a positive side to taking away retailers and "the secondary market," and that is that the people actually developing the games get the money. They can use that money to make more and better games.

 

Honestly, technology is going to change in ways you don't like. I'm just going to sit back and wait to see if I like after it matures a little and then decide what I will buy. Usually consoles drop in price and end up offering you a cutting edge gaming experience for a lower price than a high end gaming PC. Developers develop for their tech level, so you don't have to worry about the new game in that series you love working. I predict that the next gen will eventually offer me something I want at a price too good to pass up, and so I'll step in when I'm ready.

 

The secondary market is life, the games will all die as soon as the game maker/publisher no longer thinks they are profitable and you can be sure it will be maybe 3-4 years at best.

 

The mobile gaming space is a prime example, I've bought games on Android in the past (proper ones not mt's for rubbish freemium games) and the just stop supporting newer devices and silently remove them from the store - forgotten forever.

 

Digital death for games is horrible, i want to be able to enjoy x game in x amount of years not just right now before you want to flog the next service game.

 

Dark times ahead with streaming as the focus, dark times.

 

Today's consoles and maybe next gen will be looked at as the last "golden age" for games, when you could play offline and not pay a rental fee for everything.

Edited by power
  • Like 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

There is a positive side to taking away retailers and "the secondary market," and that is that the people actually developing the games get the money. They can use that money to make more and better games.

 

Only problem is, you don't take away the retailers. Majority of digital games, be it PC, console or mobile are sold through some sort of shop front, all of which take substantial cut from sales - the "industry standard" is 30%. Back in the day you'd need a publisher who'd take another big chunk - sure, now it's possible to bypass them, but then you have no ad support, apart from the word of mouth, and since the market is literally flooded with indie/mobile games only the lucky few actually make some real money, say Stardew Valley or PUBG people. The rest just gets by and/or folds. And in AAA gaming devs don't get any more than they used to, it's all business as usuall with publishers controlling the stake.

 

"Secondary market" allowed people with low incomes like me to buy and enjoy games (occasionally buy new too because of savings) and in turn allowed people who always buy new to trade theirs and buy more new games. It worked just fine for decades. And the games' quality itself didn't get any "better" or "worse" recently because of digital market.

 

Anyway, as per usual, I do not mind the digital stores themselves, but I do mind the godawful new status quo where you do not own anything. And there's no reason - apart from corporate greed - why we couldn't trade digital games too: the only "negative" effect would be a smaller (but not small) pile of goldz for Gaben and all the other CEOs to sit on.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

"Secondary market" allowed people with low incomes like me to buy and enjoy games (occasionally buy new too because of savings) and in turn allowed people who always buy new to trade theirs and buy more new games. It worked just fine for decades. And the games' quality itself didn't get any "better" or "worse" recently because of digital market.

 

While it may be less of an issue with video games than with, e.g. books, the secondary market provides access to a much broader selection of titles.

 

I began collecting for both the original PlayStation and, later, the PS 2 fairly late in their respective life cycles. I purchased the bulk of games on the secondary market simply because the selection at retail was so very limited by that point. I bought new games whenever possible, but many of the titles that I wanted were simply out-of-print by the time that I was looking for them. I had no other option than to purchase them pre-owned. Price was much less of a consideration. (I can count on one hand the number of games that I ever traded-in for store credit.)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I don't know why I feel like being a digital distribution apologist. I have mixed feelings about that trend, but I do see some other angles to it.

 

 

 

The secondary market is life, the games will all die as soon as the game maker/publisher no longer thinks they are profitable and you can be sure it will be maybe 3-4 years at best.

 

The mobile gaming space is a prime example, I've bought games on Android in the past (proper ones not mt's for rubbish freemium games) and the just stop supporting newer devices and silently remove them from the store - forgotten forever.

 

Digital death for games is horrible, i want to be able to enjoy x game in x amount of years not just right now before you want to flog the next service game.

 

Dark times ahead with streaming as the focus, dark times.

 

Today's consoles and maybe next gen will be looked at as the last "golden age" for games, when you could play offline and not pay a rental fee for everything.

 

What Android games? Just from my own observation, I see the trend being that we have MORE preservation than the past. Things that were lost in the 70's and 80's were truly lost. The work that has gone into de-fragging, burning, and re-assembling lost code is much more advanced than what I expect to happen when Johnny wants to play PUBG in 2050. Not to mention the very obvious trend of just selling us the same game over and over again. I don't expect digital "death" will really happen all that often.

 

 

Only problem is, you don't take away the retailers. Majority of digital games, be it PC, console or mobile are sold through some sort of shop front, all of which take substantial cut from sales - the "industry standard" is 30%. Back in the day you'd need a publisher who'd take another big chunk - sure, now it's possible to bypass them, but then you have no ad support, apart from the word of mouth, and since the market is literally flooded with indie/mobile games only the lucky few actually make some real money, say Stardew Valley or PUBG people. The rest just gets by and/or folds. And in AAA gaming devs don't get any more than they used to, it's all business as usuall with publishers controlling the stake.

 

"Secondary market" allowed people with low incomes like me to buy and enjoy games (occasionally buy new too because of savings) and in turn allowed people who always buy new to trade theirs and buy more new games. It worked just fine for decades. And the games' quality itself didn't get any "better" or "worse" recently because of digital market.

 

Anyway, as per usual, I do not mind the digital stores themselves, but I do mind the godawful new status quo where you do not own anything. And there's no reason - apart from corporate greed - why we couldn't trade digital games too: the only "negative" effect would be a smaller (but not small) pile of goldz for Gaben and all the other CEOs to sit on.

 

By secondary market, I think the emphasis is on resellers of used games. There will always be some sort of retail channel used to get in front of consumers, but we don't need Gamestop (as an example) anymore.

 

 

While it may be less of an issue with video games than with, e.g. books, the secondary market provides access to a much broader selection of titles.

 

I began collecting for both the original PlayStation and, later, the PS 2 fairly late in their respective life cycles. I purchased the bulk of games on the secondary market simply because the selection at retail was so very limited by that point. I bought new games whenever possible, but many of the titles that I wanted were simply out-of-print by the time that I was looking for them. I had no other option than to purchase them pre-owned. Price was much less of a consideration. (I can count on one hand the number of games that I ever traded-in for store credit.)

 

Both of you will still be able to collect older software (at a discounted price) through digital distribution. The affordable sector of gaming is alive and well and you can buy older titles on their successor console or on your PC. And while some of that re-sale goes to Microsoft, Sony, Steam, Nintendo or GoG, none of it is used to prop up a fleet of 2nd hand retail shops. In some cases it is Microsoft, Sony, Steam and Nintendo that has published and/or developed the software, so they are at least one of the risk takers in the creative process.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Whether we like it or not, many games are sold as services.

 

A. In the days of the arcade, the Space Port operator would bring in the games, we could come in and play them as much as we wanted at 25c per play, and when they stopped making money, they'd disappear and get replaced with something else.

 

B. Home games let us plunk down $30 and let us play at home, as much as we wanted, in our jammies. We could keep the cartridge and play it as long as it was still interesting to us.

 

Some games are a little of A, and a little of B. Sometimes you can get your media and play it forever. Other times you can play for free or with a subscription, but when the game is gone, it's gone. Just like when Space Port went out of business and never came back.

 

Is a game more like a pizza, something to enjoy in the moment? Or is it more like the table from which you eat it, something to keep for a long time? Is it a Pizza Hut, which was really big until it wasn't, or is it something you can make at home forever?

 

The forever-updated, interactive service-oriented games are pretty neat, and I'll bet Nolan Bushnell would have been all over them had the distribution network been available to him at the time. Gaming as a pasttime will likely continue whether or not you choose to participate in the modern forms of it, but in my experience, it's a bit more fun to suck it up and say "baa" once in a while and try to enjoy Fortnite and Minecraft and Drawful and Words with Friends. If you think that's "dark times," I'm sorry you feel that way.

  • Like 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

What Android games? Just from my own observation, I see the trend being that we have MORE preservation than the past.

 

Two examples off the top of my head were a Batman movie game that was a tie in to a movie (open world game), also Dead Space.

 

both goneskis - there's bound to be more.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Only thing that gets a little irritating is when I see people say digital distribution is the death of everything, it's not. If you put all your trust in one distribution method (Xbox Live, PSN store, Google Play etc), then yeah I can understand that. But for every Ubisoft or EA, which could give a shit about history, there's companies like CD Projekt Red and distribution fronts like GOG (whom they own). Steam which I've used for over a decade, I've never had a problem with in terms of missing or losing games over time. There's also a lot of games owned by EA and Ubisoft that are eventually showing up on GOG stripped free of DRM with everything there to download for you to keep. With Windows 10 a shit ton of games are playable, Microsoft is also embracing older games on Xbox One at at an incredible rate in the last few years. A ton of my digital library is playable from Xbox 360 right now.


Anyway my point is, gamers have a lot of choices without sticking with one thing and there's some companies thankfully with some leadership out there that actually cares, sometimes because they want you to stick with them....as long as they give me what I want I have no issues with being on board.

  • Like 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

Really? Often times when I put a game in for the first time I have to sit around while it installs from the media to the harddrive, downloads additional parts (primarily the multiplayer I'm led to believe) from psn, then download the patches which for some games can be in the gigabytes. Then I can sit down and enjoy a gimped game that has had anywhere from 20-500 dollars of content ripped out to sell separately as DLC while I sit and hope the game doesn't randomly crash because the game ends up having bugs in it that aren't yet patched yet.

 

That's of course assuming I can instantly get to the part where I put the disc in the console and can play it without the system stopping me cold and insisting I download a meaty firmware patch with very few to no notes on what it actually does - doesn't matter since it'll insist I install it.

 

If you haven't seen the changes happening to consoles over the last couple of generations I'm afraid you're the one living inside your head.

 

No, I get what he means. All of what you said is true & annoying, but there are two truths to keep in mind.

 

1- the game's still gimped on PC. They pull content out for DLC on all fronts. Unpatched bugs tend to exist across all fronts too.

2- and this is the big one- despite the annoying downloads, if I buy a PS4 game, and I put it in a PS4, it's going to work. I don't have to worry that my vid card has the wrong driver, or my sound board is below spec, or my CPU needs an upgrade. I don't have to wonder if that glitch is the game being broken or my computer having a single part out of sync with the game's expectations. I know that if I have a PS4, any PS4, I can play any PS4 disc.

 

And that's really the one thing holding me to console right now, that assuredness of what will run. The day I see 'oh, this game runs on Xbox One X, but not Xbox One... and it can work on Xbox One S, but only if I buy the SX expansion device" or something along those lines is the day I move to PC. Becuase if I have to jump through hoops to be sure my machine can actually run the game, I might as well get the advantages of user-created early bug fixes, patches, & mods, plus overall more powerful machines.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

×
×
  • Create New...