On Tuesday at 1pm EST on Spike TV they are going

Now knowing that digital purchases on all three systems are not going to be carried over to new system, I think I'm going to use Steam exclusively for multi-platform titles (I don't know what Im going to do about EA titles yet). I will still end up buying all three systems eventually, but they will most likely be for exclusive games and video playback only. I think the Xbox really loses out, in this scenario, as they have the worst exclusive game lineup, imho. I rarely buy games day one, so waiting for the PC port for a year long exclusive game isn't a big deal. The only thing that could change my mind is if the new achievements system is really engaging. Right now it seems as it will just be used as advertisement to get people to play your game, i.e. get 100 kills this weekend and get 100 gamer points. What I would like to see is a more organic achievement system. Say developers see 95% of people playing the game one way i.e. playing as a pyromancer in Dark Souls. They then can create achievements to start steering people to play using a different style that they had originally designed for but not many people actually used i.e. a faith build, thereby bringing new life into the game. Some would say that this is just bad game design but I feel it could be applied in a way that could keep the game fresh.

What I was really hoping from Microsoft was to include a CableCard reader in the device and then partner with Tivo or create their own DVR system. If the XBOX could eliminate the $15 a month I pay for renting my cable box, it would have been a day one purchase. I doubt the TV integration they showed will be that useful and snappy as they made it seem. The NFL partnership, also, seems gimicky.

I agree that the online requirement is not that big of a deal. Always online could have been a big problem based on server load, i.e. SimCity and Diablo III, server mainteance, or connection drops but the once per 24 hour limit should be easy to maintain for 99% of users. I'm pretty anti-used games/pro digital distribution, but I worry that the savings that the publishers will see from the lack of used games won't be shared with the consumer. I am expecting a pretty fluid pricing structure now for games, in which, a game that may orginally be released at $60 drops down to $15-$20 swiftly if it does not sell. I'm hoping publishers will now have the forsight and power to see that not all games are worth $60 and they should price their respective game where the demand dictates.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Timman_24

I'm thinking that the physical disk is really just a bandaid for a console that is actually entirely online. Its the same principle as being able to buy Skyrim on Steam or walk into Walmart and pick it off the shelf. You still have to authorize the physical copy through Steam to play it. The Xbox One was entirely developed to be like Steam with a disk drive tacked on so people can still pop a disk in it. All games must be installed to the HDD. The disk is just a medium for that data to be copied to the HDD. Once installed, it is validated through a key.

Xbox One disks are exactly the same as PC disks now. They are nothing but the installation data. If you give it to a friend, they must either play on your account or pay the new game price to install it. Its absolutely identical to how PC games operate. MS did say they are going to offer a second hand market, but I'm betting it will be through their service.

---

That's a great point and I'd like to see if digital options for new games will be avialble. If so then I think you have a comparable example. However, if you still need to buy a disc then I think its a awkward setup that's really there to make the brick and mortar stores willing to carry the hardware components like consoles and peripherals.

The more I chew on it the more I think that next-gen consoles are basically restricted PCs. It functions just like a PC but you are limited to a single hardware vendor that now has ultimate control over the software, community network, interface, and multimedia content.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by taggart6

That's a great point and I'd like to see if digital options for new games will be avialble. If so then I think you have a comparable example. However, if you still need to buy a disc then I think its a awkward setup that's really there to make the brick and mortar stores willing to carry the hardware components like consoles and peripherals.

The more I chew on it the more I think that next-gen consoles are basically restricted PCs. It functions just like a PC but you are limited to a single hardware vendor that now has ultimate control over the software, community network, interface, and multimedia content.

---

I think the disc is there for three reasons. Brick and mortar like you said for sure is one. MS still needs big box stores to get consoles into the hands of customers and be able to prominently display the games to catch the impulse purchasers. Secondly, a 40GB download (or whatever the future size of games will be) is large today. The difference between being able to authorize a game, which 56k could do, and download a 40GB file is night and day, so the disc has to stay for now. Lastly, a lot of people still aren't comfortable with all digital downloads, especially when the downloads cost $60. Joe Call of Duty wants some dog tags in the box and a feeling of ownership that a digital item can't give. On a smaller note, MS is pushing this thing as the "All-in-One" system, so they have to have a bluray drive or it feels pointless. You can't tout that you can do everything and then not be able to play movies.

I've heard some fringe cases being discussed where the online activation window of 24 hours could be very restricting. They include moving to a new house, fighting games in hotel rooms (yup a lot of people actually hold tournaments in hotel rooms for high end competition), or internet outages. I think an increase to weekly or so would be more appropriate, but its all new so we will see how they react to what happens when these things are out in the wild.

I'm actually happy to see the used market disappear. It kills me that people will give gamestop 60% markup on used games to save 5 bucks. Hopefully developers can be better paid and we see more games come out. This is a GREAT thing for mostly single-player games (which are traded in most often) and maybe we will finally stop seeing the gross use of preorder DLC that publishers had to tack on to try to stave off used purchases.

http://www.theonion.com/articles/fea...adline:default

Quote:

---

Windows XP operating system
Will offer new titles in such popular Xbox series as Ace Combat, Kane & Lynch, Crash
Time, and Call of Juarez
Xbox Hat—Say the words “Xbox Hat” out loud and a large image of a hat will appear on your TV screen
92-Core x500 P2W (G4-Jig system), 2F3 DLX silver frame technology, 2/5/5/MP2s zoomnet capability, Zip control (TV/satellite/laptop), 3.1.8 optical input-output, 34V-876-ZZB, custom 2x cross-memory feedback, DVD
Ability to capture live game play, edit it, and send it to your pathetic friends
500 GB of added system memory you can buy separately for more ****ing money
Color green probably in there somewhere
Kinect motion sensor capable of responding to what you consider movement
Preloaded with episodes of Get Smart
Gumball dispenser

---

I don't understand the dislike regarding used games. As a society, we resell used items like cars, homes, furniture, clothes, and pretty much anything that's non perishable. Why are games any different? Other forms of used media are constantly resold but rarely if ever do you hear people argue about it.

IMHO, reselling of used consumer items is perhaps the truest reflection of a free market. I will not buy a product at a full price because I honestly don't think its worth it for the cost the owner wants. It's really as simple as that. Offer it to me at a price I think its worth and I'll gladly pay. If I can't get the product for a price I want then I'll move on. Stopping used sales isn't going to magically increase the owners's revenue because i have no alternative. I just won't buy it and will look for something else to spend my money on.

I can understand a person's desire to want to support the creators of things they love. I do it all the time for a variety of items including games. However, I think its humorous that people will focus on this particular market and cry bloody murder when the subject of used games comes up because they feel games are unique and special when really they aren't. Its amazing because MS isn't even getting rid of the used game market but rather monopolizing it for all future xbox games. Used games sells will still be there but under the name of "game transfers" and will be controlled by a single company who will set pricing and policy. I think that's more frightening then the general discussion over used items.

Used games on consoles wouldn't even be an issue if the console gaming market offered more sales like their PC counterpart. However that will never happen as long as console games continue to have a big presence in brick and mortar stores and the additional cost for physical media. Personally, I rather see all consoles die and have all games move to the PC where the market is more competitive and more digital options exist to keep prices low.

I'm not anti-used sales in general. For console games there has been a major focus for publishers to stymy the used market using tactics that end up affecting the quality of games. Like I said before, preorder dlc, multiplayer passes, and cramming multiplayer into single player games in an effort to delay trade ins have all run rampant throughout the last gen.

As for philosophy, I've mostly thought of games as consumables and not objects the same as cars, clothes, etc. Legally, we don't "own" a game, but "own" a right to access the game. This access was linked to the physical medium in the previous gen. The access is now being switched to the account in which the game was linked to.

I guess we will see how it pans out. I don't really care too much either way.

I can see a difference between content versus a more physical good. When you resell a used car you are selling a car that is physically degraded. When you sell a used game, the content has been preserved perfectly. Yes the disc might wear but the content is really what you want.

However, I see no difference between games and other media and yet we don't see nearly the same amount of anger toward used movie, tv and book sales as we do with used games.

It's been pretty lonely since I switched to PS3 a year ago...can't wait to see you guys on PS4 :)

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by taggart6

I can see a difference between content versus a more physical good. When you resell a used car you are selling a car that is physically degraded. When you sell a used game, the content has been preserved perfectly. Yes the disc might wear but the content is really what you want.

However, I see no difference between games and other media and yet we don't see nearly the same amount of anger toward used movie, tv and book sales as we do with used games.

---

Maybe I missed it, but what anger are you talking about? The industry's focus on trying to eliminate it, the community's backlash, or the gamers that dislike used games?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Astros Fan

It's been pretty lonely since I switched to PS3 a year ago...can't wait to see you guys on PS4 :)

---

Right now I'm leaning more toward the PS4 mainly because of its game focus and the much more powerful GPU. From what Anandtech wrote about the hardware differences, the PS4's GPU is 50% more powerful. Its not like the Cell either, which was much harder to juice that extra potential from. These are identical other than the PS4 having more potency. I think the Xbox One has a lot of nice entertainment features, its just that I don't care about many of them.

...And if netflix is behind a paywall again...

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Timman_24

Maybe I missed it, but what anger are you talking about? The industry's focus on trying to eliminate it, the community's backlash, or the gamers that dislike used games?

---

ABy anger I mean the general gaming industries intense dislike of it. Used sales seems much more vocalized regarding games then with film, tv, books, comics, and nearly all other forms of media.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by taggart6

ABy anger I mean the general gaming industries intense dislike of it. Used sales seems much more vocalized regarding games then with film, tv, books, comics, and nearly all other forms of media.

---

That's true. Maybe it has something to do with the revenue streams. Game money is all made on the sale of the game. Movies get a major source from ticket sales, toys, and merchandising, much like music sales as well.

I'd say piracy is a bigger issue than used sales in the movies and music industry. I haven't seen a used music store in years.

They haven't needed to be very vocal about it. Fighting piracy kills the used market as a casuality of war. With iTunes, Netflix, Spotify, etc, licensing agreements and digital sales probably make much more now than physical disk sales.

It is all about revenue and I think its a horrible misconception for the gaming industry to view all piracy and used games transactions as lost sales. That's simply not true and that false belief results in poor policy and planning on the industry side of the gaming community.

Piracy and used sales is an issue of cost and not one of convenience or desire. It is far easier to purchase a game then have to jump through the hoops of getting a cracked version to work or locating a used copy within a particular time frame. The issue has and always will be cost and what someone is willing to or can even afford to pay. Sanctions and restrictions against piracy and used sales will not magically give pirates and used buyers the money to purchase new and subsequently raise the profit margins of the gaming industry to a higher sustainable baseline.

Preventing used sales and piracy isn't going to fix the revenue problems of the gaming industry. The problems are companies making risky gambles on gimmicks that don't work or hedging their bets on bad choices that alienate and aggravate customers. Piracy and used games have become an excuse for an industry that is killing itself from the inside out because of poor leadership and poor planning.

Jason Schreier from Kotaku has a post that I think does a good job echoing my sentiment: http://kotaku.com/used-games-arent-t...ndus-509593780

The problem with blaming it all on the companies for making choices for games that don't end up working out is that that point of view would cause companies to only take the safe bet. That means no new IP, no risks like Farcry Blood Dragon, and a very boring investment in future games. Piracy and used sales are surely not the only reason, but there are people out there that pirate or buy used games that could afford new. The magnitude of that is beyond what I could try to estimate, but obviously the industry thinks its a size able enough issue to possibly take severe backlash over. The next few months will be interesting.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Timman_24

The problem with blaming it all on the companies for making choices for games that don't end up working out is that that point of view would cause companies to only take the safe bet. That means no new IP, no risks like Farcry Blood Dragon, and a very boring investment in future games. Piracy and used sales are surely not the only reason, but there are people out there that pirate or buy used games that could afford new. The magnitude of that is beyond what I could try to estimate, but obviously the industry thinks its a size able enough issue to possibly take severe backlash over. The next few months will be interesting.

---

I disagree. Potential sales lost to piracy and used games cannot make up for poor products that people don't want to buy and that are priced at a point people will not pay. The industry is looking for a scapegoat rather then take a good hard look at itself. It's easier to generalize that all people steal and shop for lower priced items because they want to rather then because they simply can't afford to pay for things they don't think are worth it. People pirate and purchase used because of cost. They rather go through the inconvenience of managing hacks and waiting for a used copy then purchase new. Even the issue of affordability is a moot people if people with the means to purchase new still don't feel the product justifies the cost. Its a cost vs product worth issue pure ans simple.

Amazon and Steam have already shown that competitive pricing abd heavily discounted sales is both a successful and profitable way to combat piracy and used games. Yet, the console market still hasn't adopted those practices and won't until they are forced too. I'm curious to know why that is and what prevents them from doing. My guess is that console hardware ties you to only a single provider of digital media content. That lack of competition basically gives the provider free reign to set what ever price they want as long as they can get you to buy their console.

Either way, the console devs are free to do what ever they want. They owe us nothing. However, I have the freedom to support my stance by not participating when I have a more cost effective and rewarding option with my PC.

Attachment 185

Thought this was funny.

There's no doubt in my mind that the Kinect will randomly turn on for an instant to take a snapshot of it's surroundings and identify brands that you use. MS could make a nice chunk of change off of essentially doing nothing. They can then plaster your UI with more specific ads even though you're paying a yearly sub that's supposed to already offset the operating costs.

*weird, I linked from my computer and it actually made it a link*

Yathzee pretty much hit the nail on the head in his latest ZP:

http://www.escapistmagazine.com/vide...n-Buyers-Guide

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by taggart6

I disagree. Potential sales lost to piracy and used games cannot make up for poor products that people don't want to buy and that are priced at a point people will not pay. The industry is looking for a scapegoat rather then take a good hard look at itself. It's easier to generalize that all people steal and shop for lower priced items because they want to rather then because they simply can't afford to pay for things they don't think are worth it. People pirate and purchase used because of cost. They rather go through the inconvenience of managing hacks and waiting for a used copy then purchase new. Even the issue of affordability is a moot people if people with the means to purchase new still don't feel the product justifies the cost. Its a cost vs product worth issue pure ans simple.

Amazon and Steam have already shown that competitive pricing abd heavily discounted sales is both a successful and profitable way to combat piracy and used games. Yet, the console market still hasn't adopted those practices and won't until they are forced too. I'm curious to know why that is and what prevents them from doing. My guess is that console hardware ties you to only a single provider of digital media content. That lack of competition basically gives the provider free reign to set what ever price they want as long as they can get you to buy their console.

Either way, the console devs are free to do what ever they want. They owe us nothing. However, I have the freedom to support my stance by not participating when I have a more cost effective and rewarding option with my PC.

---

I totally agree with your assertions. I never said piracy or used sales were the only reason, just a part of the problem. However, your second paragraph is coming to fruition right now. MS and Sony couldn't instantly switch to digital like Steam could because they had immovable policies tied to the last gen of consoles. With the new gen we are seeing them go to the Steam model, to combat piracy and used sales much like Steam did. However, the unknown is whether or not they will go all the way and attack the core issue that you described. A 6 hour single player game can not be $60 anymore, it needs to be $15. There needs to be prices that better reflect demand. $60 for two months, then $39.99, then blow out sales like Steam. This must be put into place or the console market can die in a corner for all I care.

BTW, what console are you leaning towards at the moment? The Kinetic always-on issue has me very turned off. I don't want a direct feed of my living room running 24/7.

Nothing so far. I don't know enough about the PS4 to form an idea, the Xbox1 bothers me on a number of different levels, and the WiiU game offering is pretty weak IMHO. I also have a massive backlog of current games so I'm not motivated to purchase anything new other then a PC.

If I had to bet on it, I might pick up the WiiU down the road if the library improves. I hear they are making a HD Xenoblade remake for WiiU which would be amazing. If more games like that, the Last story, Monster Hunter, new Zelda, Metroid, and etc come out, then I might bite.

I'm actually considering building a low end gaming HTPC when I upgrade my main rig in the next 2-3 months. I have a bunch of controller based PC games that would play great on my future 71 inch plasma.

I recently swapped cases and built a watercooled ITX build with a 3570k and a 7970. Its small enough to easily tote between my desk and living room although it mostly stays in the living room. I went a little over board and bought a Case Labs Mercury S3 case and did copper tubing...

I will simply not plug in the kinect, and if we have to have it plugged in, simply cover the sensor.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Snakespy

I will simply not plug in the kinect, and if we have to have it plugged in, simply cover the sensor.

---

I've been skeptical on if they will allow you to cover it. They've said it will use facial recognition to identify players, users, and to make sure the primary player is issuing kinetic commands (so someone can't walk into the room and say "Xbox Off.")

I watched G4TV last night and they had a few new trailers. They had NFS Rivals, some new horror game from Zombieland, and Titanfall. What I noticed is that the Zombieland game was PS4 and PC while Titanfall was Xbox One and PC. It seems that PC is getting everything but the consoles are fighting over "console exclusivity." Due to how these are x86 systems, PC gamers may get almost all the 3rd party "console exclusive" games this year. Will we see Forza 5 for PC?!?!? PLEASE!!!

If this turns out to be the case, then I will stick to the PC. MS just released "clarified" descriptions of their DRM and it sounds rough.

I don't want it to recognize my voice, my face whatever. I play every game with a controller in my hand. That's just stupid that is has to always be on.

I've been wondering if it'll be much easier for emulators to be made this gen since they're basically off the shelf parts (aside from the massive amounts of GDDR5 for the PS3). I imagine the only thing holding them back would be the phoning home with the XBONE. I'd really like to buy console exclusives but not get sucked into yet more walled gardens.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by dyne

I've been wondering if it'll be much easier for emulators to be made this gen since they're basically off the shelf parts (aside from the massive amounts of GDDR5 for the PS3). I imagine the only thing holding them back would be the phoning home with the XBONE. I'd really like to buy console exclusives but not get sucked into yet more walled gardens.

---

If they use a 256bit encryption key like Google then I doubt there is much people could do with it.