- Status
velocityg4
Glorious
- Nov 21, 2006
- 5,390
- 472
- 46,440
I could care less about all these social features. I want better graphics, the ability to just add hard drive storage from off the shelf components, and no DRM that locks a game to a specific console as some patents indicate.
The touch screen controller sounds idiotic. Who wants to take their eyes off the game to use the touch screen?
What would be nice is a keyboard and mouse. Some titles just play much better with them. Such as Sim City and Total War games. Basically any strategy game or building game needs a keyboard and mouse. This is the biggest factor that keeps me away from consoles and using Windows as these are my favorite games. The only game that interests me on consoles is Gran Turismo as all the racing games for Windows suck.
The touch screen controller sounds idiotic. Who wants to take their eyes off the game to use the touch screen?
What would be nice is a keyboard and mouse. Some titles just play much better with them. Such as Sim City and Total War games. Basically any strategy game or building game needs a keyboard and mouse. This is the biggest factor that keeps me away from consoles and using Windows as these are my favorite games. The only game that interests me on consoles is Gran Turismo as all the racing games for Windows suck.
mobrocket
Distinguished
- Feb 28, 2011
- 591
- 0
- 19,010
[citation][nom]bunz_of_steel[/nom]Oh yeh forgot to mention like the stupid PS3 .... still only has 802.11G! suk!!!![/citation]
PS4 packs 8GB of unified GDDR5 RAM capable of 176GB/sec of bandwidth. 802.11n WiFi, USB 3.0, Bluetooth 2.1, HDMI, optical out
PS4 packs 8GB of unified GDDR5 RAM capable of 176GB/sec of bandwidth. 802.11n WiFi, USB 3.0, Bluetooth 2.1, HDMI, optical out
Honestly that conference was a waste of time,they didnt give a price point or show the console,just the fact that the sorftware on it can easily be ported to a pc due to the x86 architecture.They didnt show any meaningful software and the social features dont grab me(but then again that stuff doesnt grab me period).Worst offender was Square Enix in terms of the lineup,showing last years tech demo and saying your making another Final Fantasy game, come on, thats just lazy.
anxiousinfusion
Distinguished
- Jul 1, 2011
- 1,035
- 0
- 19,360
Good, now where is the Xbox announcement so we can all know the specs for the entire console spectrum?
blackjackcf
Honorable
- Mar 8, 2012
- 42
- 0
- 10,530
[citation][nom]koss64[/nom]Honestly that conference was a waste of time,they didnt give a price point or show the console,just the fact that the sorftware on it can easily be ported to a pc due to the x86 architecture.They didnt show any meaningful software and the social features dont grab me(but then again that stuff doesnt grab me period).Worst offender was Square Enix in terms of the lineup,showing last years tech demo and saying your making another Final Fantasy game, come on, thats just lazy.[/citation]
I definitely felt the same frustration. However, they do have E3 to worry about, so I expect that they'll be talking a little bit more about the price and release date later in the year.
This conference was just a good marketing/PR move. They got the name out there so people would be talking about it, and hyped it with plenty of exciting titles.
I definitely felt the same frustration. However, they do have E3 to worry about, so I expect that they'll be talking a little bit more about the price and release date later in the year.
This conference was just a good marketing/PR move. They got the name out there so people would be talking about it, and hyped it with plenty of exciting titles.
kinggraves
Distinguished
- May 14, 2010
- 951
- 0
- 19,010
[citation][nom]drwho1[/nom]http://www.amazon.com/Watch-Dogs-P [...] watch+dogsat $100 dollars per game they can keep the console and games to themselves.[/citation]
It's a placeholder. They always set OP prices for placeholders because they aren't actually selling anything yet.
I suppose this is why devs backed off on their announcements for the Wii U after it launched. Funny how even though network sharing and touchpad controls were ideas that originated on that device, they're suddenly next gen with Sony doing them. Looks like Nintendo fans aren't getting 3rd party games this gen either.
Then again, with half of these teams "pledging support" with very little to show for it, it's abit early to jump the gun. I've seen people describing these as "exclusives" even though the devs have not said anything about exclusivity and MS has yet to show their own cards.
There's a lot left in the air. Obviously Sony isn't going to set the price before E3, but this thing's hardware would make the bill comparable to the ps3's. It'd be a dangerous venture to take a severe hit on hardware again and underprice it, but that's what they'd have to do. Sony is banking a lot of this system being the top dog, anything else and they may face hard times in the future. They also tapdanced around some of the more negative rumors like banning used games. Sony has commented on that issue saying they "will not prevent people from playing used games". Sounds promising, but that's a translated statement, and I've never believed it would be Sony or MS making the decision to prevent it for all games. My theory is that it will be left to the publisher to decide. No comment on whether this requires an internet connection either.
Unlike most consumers, fancy sparkles do not cause me to forget. Sony's promising some amazing things here, but Sony is not very good at keeping promises. How long until playing old PS games with Gaikai is no longer a feature and sharing games had to be disabled to prevent piracy?
It's a placeholder. They always set OP prices for placeholders because they aren't actually selling anything yet.
I suppose this is why devs backed off on their announcements for the Wii U after it launched. Funny how even though network sharing and touchpad controls were ideas that originated on that device, they're suddenly next gen with Sony doing them. Looks like Nintendo fans aren't getting 3rd party games this gen either.
Then again, with half of these teams "pledging support" with very little to show for it, it's abit early to jump the gun. I've seen people describing these as "exclusives" even though the devs have not said anything about exclusivity and MS has yet to show their own cards.
There's a lot left in the air. Obviously Sony isn't going to set the price before E3, but this thing's hardware would make the bill comparable to the ps3's. It'd be a dangerous venture to take a severe hit on hardware again and underprice it, but that's what they'd have to do. Sony is banking a lot of this system being the top dog, anything else and they may face hard times in the future. They also tapdanced around some of the more negative rumors like banning used games. Sony has commented on that issue saying they "will not prevent people from playing used games". Sounds promising, but that's a translated statement, and I've never believed it would be Sony or MS making the decision to prevent it for all games. My theory is that it will be left to the publisher to decide. No comment on whether this requires an internet connection either.
Unlike most consumers, fancy sparkles do not cause me to forget. Sony's promising some amazing things here, but Sony is not very good at keeping promises. How long until playing old PS games with Gaikai is no longer a feature and sharing games had to be disabled to prevent piracy?
universal remonster
Distinguished
- Nov 23, 2011
- 119
- 0
- 18,690
[citation][nom]steve360[/nom]Diablo 3 on the console - Activision's goal of corrupting Blizzard is complete.[/citation]
Didn't take long for the nerds to chime in with something stupid. Diablo was on Playstation.. Warcraft 2 was on Playstation and Saturn.. Blizzard has tons on other games on multiple consoles. Now all of the sudden its an issue, just because nerds need new drama to exagerate and complain about on the internet. I'm all for PC 100%, but games like Torchlight and some of the older Balur's Gate/Champions of Norrath games have shown that Diablo style RPG's can play very well with controllers on consoles and sometimes even better than their PC counterparts.
Didn't take long for the nerds to chime in with something stupid. Diablo was on Playstation.. Warcraft 2 was on Playstation and Saturn.. Blizzard has tons on other games on multiple consoles. Now all of the sudden its an issue, just because nerds need new drama to exagerate and complain about on the internet. I'm all for PC 100%, but games like Torchlight and some of the older Balur's Gate/Champions of Norrath games have shown that Diablo style RPG's can play very well with controllers on consoles and sometimes even better than their PC counterparts.
susyque747
Honorable
- Jan 12, 2013
- 155
- 0
- 10,680
[citation][nom]drwho1[/nom]http://www.amazon.com/Watch-Dogs-P [...] watch+dogsat $100 dollars per game they can keep the console and games to themselves.[/citation]
Thats going overboard if true and "predict" what games a user might like and pre-download them. My cable company has limits on my data then I pay extra. This had better be able to be turned off.
Thats going overboard if true and "predict" what games a user might like and pre-download them. My cable company has limits on my data then I pay extra. This had better be able to be turned off.
susyque747
Honorable
- Jan 12, 2013
- 155
- 0
- 10,680
[citation][nom]weierstrass[/nom]Provide official drivers and let me run Linux on it and you have me. I mean if I can't run console titles on PC let me use the console *also* as a PC.[/citation]
Since this will be standard PC hardware, probably with some proprietary chips to keep it looked down. Can't wait to see how long it takes to be hacked and Linux installed.
Since this will be standard PC hardware, probably with some proprietary chips to keep it looked down. Can't wait to see how long it takes to be hacked and Linux installed.
shikamaru31789
Honorable
- Nov 23, 2012
- 274
- 0
- 10,780
[citation][nom]drwho1[/nom]http://www.amazon.com/Watch-Dogs-P [...] watch+dogsat $100 dollars per game they can keep the console and games to themselves.[/citation]
That's a placeholder price. Amazon has no price to put there since next-gen pricing hasn't been revealed yet, so they put $100 to be safe, easier to give partial refunds on preorders than to ask for more money from people that have already preordered. Do you honestly think that they're going to charge that much when PC games are already cheaper? Unless multiplatform PC game prices are going up as well, I doubt we'll see much of a price increase this gen, if any increase at all. I wouldn't expect anything higher than $70, and more than likely it'll stay at $60, and if Microsoft and Sony are smart, we'll see digital prices fall to $50 to match PC.
That's a placeholder price. Amazon has no price to put there since next-gen pricing hasn't been revealed yet, so they put $100 to be safe, easier to give partial refunds on preorders than to ask for more money from people that have already preordered. Do you honestly think that they're going to charge that much when PC games are already cheaper? Unless multiplatform PC game prices are going up as well, I doubt we'll see much of a price increase this gen, if any increase at all. I wouldn't expect anything higher than $70, and more than likely it'll stay at $60, and if Microsoft and Sony are smart, we'll see digital prices fall to $50 to match PC.
[citation][nom][citation][nom]demonhorde665[/nom]seriously sick of you rich elitist thinking teh PC game market shoudl cater to the super rich only. Further more saying pc graphics stagnated after 2006 is just retarded. you show me a top end PC from 2006 that can run EVERY modern game today at 1080p with max settings , and i;'ll show you mirror so you can see what a liar looks like. compare skyrim (2011) on pc to oblivion (2006) and tell me they look the same. then lets not forget games like crysis (1 and 2) and metro, I still cant get either of those games to run better than 35 fps average on my 2008 PC a PC that is well beyound top end for 2006. pc graphics have advanced plenty hell console games if any thing have fallen short trying to advance up (look at the difference betwen DA on pc and xbox 360). qqqqqqquite hoenstly this generation has made me one VERY happy PC gamer. becasue i built this rig in 2008 only updated the cpu and video card 1 time and my rig is still a very doable gaming system right now. The only reason i'm gonna build a new rig soon is because of my mom's dying PC (I'm giving her this one when i get my new one ). how can any one be frusterated with not having to spend a small fortune replacing a pc every year ??? just sound's like whiney elitist BS to me . if any thing this generation has made PC gaming even less frusterating given the longivity on pc hardware this generation. and Las but not least , what's more important to you as a gamer in general , having uber graphics , or having uber game play ?[/citation]
what is retarded is that you pretty much claimed that current gen consoles were on par with PC computers circa 2006/7 and were displaying games in full 1080p 60fps.......You name one AAA/AA/whatever console game that ran and displayed NATIVELY in 1080P NOT "i" and at least 30FPS..... Anything from 2006-and now? No, there were NONE. The comparison you made that PC's in 2006 were not able to run games from then and now in 1080P is BS. They can in fact. The only exception was Crysis which was ahead of its time. It was not until late 2007 when the 9800GTX came out that c people could play Crysis at 30+ fps with very high settings and 2XAA. Consoles have ALWAYS been at the lower end of coding in terms of visuals, map size, ai, mechanics, and physics. PC's, since they are not a major market focus, are not the primary platform and so instead games are just ported over from consoles. Developers and publishers deliberately do not take take advantage of PC hardware when porting over to PC. They want everyone using any platform to have the exact same experience as possible. Did you read about what EA said about Dead Space not being superior on PC? Read about their lousy explanation. Anyways, since 2006/7, system requirements have not increased or changed very much; still using dx9, no better than core 2 duo, and no more than 1 or 2 gigs of memory. The requirements have been the same for almost 7 years for the majority of games. That seems pretty damned stagnate to me. This is why PC "elitist" get so pissed off. At any rate bohohohoho if you are a poor little peasant who can't afford a good computer. Get a job, save up and build your self a decent spec computer. If you don't want to then whatever. Your comments are reminiscent of tea party members making incoherent and retarded claims about academics as being elitists. The word "elitist" has been overused by a lot of idiots. But honestly it really only reflects their own short comings...
what is retarded is that you pretty much claimed that current gen consoles were on par with PC computers circa 2006/7 and were displaying games in full 1080p 60fps.......You name one AAA/AA/whatever console game that ran and displayed NATIVELY in 1080P NOT "i" and at least 30FPS..... Anything from 2006-and now? No, there were NONE. The comparison you made that PC's in 2006 were not able to run games from then and now in 1080P is BS. They can in fact. The only exception was Crysis which was ahead of its time. It was not until late 2007 when the 9800GTX came out that c people could play Crysis at 30+ fps with very high settings and 2XAA. Consoles have ALWAYS been at the lower end of coding in terms of visuals, map size, ai, mechanics, and physics. PC's, since they are not a major market focus, are not the primary platform and so instead games are just ported over from consoles. Developers and publishers deliberately do not take take advantage of PC hardware when porting over to PC. They want everyone using any platform to have the exact same experience as possible. Did you read about what EA said about Dead Space not being superior on PC? Read about their lousy explanation. Anyways, since 2006/7, system requirements have not increased or changed very much; still using dx9, no better than core 2 duo, and no more than 1 or 2 gigs of memory. The requirements have been the same for almost 7 years for the majority of games. That seems pretty damned stagnate to me. This is why PC "elitist" get so pissed off. At any rate bohohohoho if you are a poor little peasant who can't afford a good computer. Get a job, save up and build your self a decent spec computer. If you don't want to then whatever. Your comments are reminiscent of tea party members making incoherent and retarded claims about academics as being elitists. The word "elitist" has been overused by a lot of idiots. But honestly it really only reflects their own short comings...
[citation][nom]atminside[/nom]what is retarded is that you pretty much claimed that current gen consoles were on par with PC computers circa 2006/7 and were displaying games in full 1080p 60fps.......You name one AAA/AA/whatever console game that ran and displayed NATIVELY in 1080P NOT "i" and at least 30FPS..... Anything from 2006-and now? No, there were NONE. The comparison you made that PC's in 2006 were not able to run games from then and now in 1080P is BS. They can in fact. The only exception was Crysis which was ahead of its time. It was not until late 2007 when the 9800GTX came out that c people could play Crysis at 30+ fps with very high settings and 2XAA. Consoles have ALWAYS been at the lower end of coding in terms of visuals, map size, ai, mechanics, and physics. PC's, since they are not a major market focus, are not the primary platform and so instead games are just ported over from consoles. Developers and publishers deliberately do not take take advantage of PC hardware when porting over to PC. They want everyone using any platform to have the exact same experience as possible. Did you read about what EA said about Dead Space not being superior on PC? Read about their lousy explanation. Anyways, since 2006/7, system requirements have not increased or changed very much; still using dx9, no better than core 2 duo, and no more than 1 or 2 gigs of memory. The requirements have been the same for almost 7 years for the majority of games. That seems pretty damned stagnate to me. This is why PC "elitist" get so pissed off. At any rate bohohohoho if you are a poor little peasant who can't afford a good computer. Get a job, save up and build your self a decent spec computer. If you don't want to then whatever. Your comments are reminiscent of tea party members making incoherent and retarded claims about academics as being elitists. The word "elitist" has been overused by a lot of idiots. But honestly it really only reflects their own short comings...[/citation]
Gran Turismo 5
Gran Turismo 5
bluegman991
Honorable
- Jan 25, 2013
- 5
- 0
- 10,510
[citation][nom]velocityg4[/nom]I could care less about all these social features. I want better graphics, the ability to just add hard drive storage from off the shelf components, and no DRM that locks a game to a specific console as some patents indicate. The touch screen controller sounds idiotic. Who wants to take their eyes off the game to use the touch screen?What would be nice is a keyboard and mouse. Some titles just play much better with them. Such as Sim City and Total War games. Basically any strategy game or building game needs a keyboard and mouse. This is the biggest factor that keeps me away from consoles and using Windows as these are my favorite games. The only game that interests me on consoles is Gran Turismo as all the racing games for Windows suck.[/citation]
It is only a touch pad not a touch screen. No need to take eyes off of screen.
It is only a touch pad not a touch screen. No need to take eyes off of screen.
Spooderman
Honorable
- Jan 13, 2013
- 208
- 0
- 10,680
[citation][nom]drwho1[/nom]http://www.amazon.com/Watch-Dogs-P [...] watch+dogsat $100 dollars per game they can keep the console and games to themselves.[/citation]
Topic From this Discussion
100$ PS4?!?!?!?!?!?!?!...
$100 price is just a place holder. Amazon does not know what next gen games are going to retail for and therefore do not want to set the pre-order price too low because they would have to honor it. $100 is a safe bet for them, because they know it will probably be lower so they won't lose out and... Read more
16 hours ago by J. Dolley | See all 12 posts
Topic From this Discussion
100$ PS4?!?!?!?!?!?!?!...
$100 price is just a place holder. Amazon does not know what next gen games are going to retail for and therefore do not want to set the pre-order price too low because they would have to honor it. $100 is a safe bet for them, because they know it will probably be lower so they won't lose out and... Read more
16 hours ago by J. Dolley | See all 12 posts
[citation][nom]therabiddeer[/nom]Thats the unofficial price that Amazon sets. Note it also says Dec 31st release date. They havent announced the pricing OR the release date.If games actually end up costing $100 each, I will eat my poo on live camera.[/citation]
I hope your prophecy comes thru otherwise, you're going to be one sick puppy, don't even like seeing my pets eat their own poop..ugh.
Games have been getting a bit more expensive than I knew them, with the CDs/DVD-Rom they were supposed to be allow for games to be cheaper as they were less expensive for duplication that with games that came on cartridges but didn't seem to turn out that way. Prices of games were moving up instead of down. Ever see when they come out with these collector or ultimate editions or whatever and they cost upwards to about $75 or more, because they included extras, though nothing I cared for but must have had some people biting as I shop for used games and I see those around in the used shops.
I hope your prophecy comes thru otherwise, you're going to be one sick puppy, don't even like seeing my pets eat their own poop..ugh.
Games have been getting a bit more expensive than I knew them, with the CDs/DVD-Rom they were supposed to be allow for games to be cheaper as they were less expensive for duplication that with games that came on cartridges but didn't seem to turn out that way. Prices of games were moving up instead of down. Ever see when they come out with these collector or ultimate editions or whatever and they cost upwards to about $75 or more, because they included extras, though nothing I cared for but must have had some people biting as I shop for used games and I see those around in the used shops.
[citation]To make a computer with the rough estimates of the PlayStation three specs would cost about $900.Sony isn't going to touch the $600 price point againIt's likely that the console cost between 400 and $500With that said it's roughly half the price of buying a computer with similar specs, I say that's a fair discount. And this will probably be the case for the next two years at least.[/citation]
right, the big leap isn't the deal on the hardware its how easy it will be to jailbreak it and effectively use it as a PC.
right, the big leap isn't the deal on the hardware its how easy it will be to jailbreak it and effectively use it as a PC.
[citation][nom]mobrocket[/nom]PS4 packs 8GB of unified GDDR5 RAM capable of 176GB/sec of bandwidth. 802.11n WiFi, USB 3.0, Bluetooth 2.1, HDMI, optical out[/citation]
you can tell this was designed 5 years ago! it should have 802.11 ac. bluetooth 3 or even 4 (better power saving, bandwith)
the ddr5 is good. dunno about the apu tho
you can tell this was designed 5 years ago! it should have 802.11 ac. bluetooth 3 or even 4 (better power saving, bandwith)
the ddr5 is good. dunno about the apu tho
[citation][nom]velocityg4[/nom] This is the biggest factor that keeps me away from consoles and using Windows as these are my favorite games. The only game that interests me on consoles is Gran Turismo as all the racing games for Windows suck.[/citation]
There are a quite a few of sims that are better than Gran Turismo 5: rFactor, most of what Simbin releases, iRacing and so on. There are quite a few sims that are soon to come out that will soon join the party, in regards to games that are better than Gran Turismo 5 (see Assetto Corsa, Project CARS, GTR 3, RaceRoom Racing Experience) .
GT5's lack of realistic damage, realistic clutch, and realistic sounds really kill the game. GT5 has even more set-backs: Lack of additional real tracks (besides what they've offered so far), online community, mostly standard cars, over 1000 cars and more than dozens of them are repeats or just a different year.
PS3's limitations are also big cons: you cant use USB headsets as your audio and talk, triple screens (PS3 requires 3 consoles and 3 copies of the game to do so), and you can't use additional accessories that the pc world allows for.
I'm a GT fan myself, but there are way better sims out there. Humor me and youtube this: iRacing.com 2.4 hours of Daytona 2012.
There are a quite a few of sims that are better than Gran Turismo 5: rFactor, most of what Simbin releases, iRacing and so on. There are quite a few sims that are soon to come out that will soon join the party, in regards to games that are better than Gran Turismo 5 (see Assetto Corsa, Project CARS, GTR 3, RaceRoom Racing Experience) .
GT5's lack of realistic damage, realistic clutch, and realistic sounds really kill the game. GT5 has even more set-backs: Lack of additional real tracks (besides what they've offered so far), online community, mostly standard cars, over 1000 cars and more than dozens of them are repeats or just a different year.
PS3's limitations are also big cons: you cant use USB headsets as your audio and talk, triple screens (PS3 requires 3 consoles and 3 copies of the game to do so), and you can't use additional accessories that the pc world allows for.
I'm a GT fan myself, but there are way better sims out there. Humor me and youtube this: iRacing.com 2.4 hours of Daytona 2012.
- Status
TRENDING THREADS
-
-
-
-
-
Discussion What's your favourite video game you've been playing?- Started by amdfangirl
- Replies: 4K
Facebook
Twitter
Instagram