|
On May 22 2013 19:55 paralleluniverse wrote:
PS4 doesn't have backward compatibility either.
It's been confirmed PS4 will have backwards compatibility at some point via a software update.
While that's not as good as out of the box, at least Sony recognize people still enjoy their old games and don't want to shut the door completely.
|
On May 22 2013 19:19 paralleluniverse wrote:Tell me specifically what gaming feature is missing. More TV features != less gaming features.
Do americans really still watch that much TV? Here in germany TV is like radio - its basically dead. Its only used for big sport-events.
I don't watch any shows/movies or news on TV anymore for like 5 years.
|
On May 22 2013 20:39 Aldehyde wrote:Show nested quote +On May 22 2013 20:35 NightOfTheDead wrote:On May 22 2013 20:32 Aldehyde wrote:On May 22 2013 20:28 NightOfTheDead wrote:On May 22 2013 20:26 Aldehyde wrote:On May 22 2013 20:22 Shikyo wrote:On May 22 2013 20:17 Aldehyde wrote:On May 22 2013 19:06 paralleluniverse wrote:On May 22 2013 18:50 Nekovivie wrote:
I really dont understand why you would design it to not have backwards compatibility. Theres a lot of great 360 games that will never get played now, because not many people are going to buy a 360 who doesn't already have one. They'll buy the latest console. I also don't understand why it doesn't have backwards compatibility, but not in the usual sense. What I really don't understand is why the concept of "backwards compatibility" isn't extinct yet. When's the last time someone announced that a digital games platform like Steam doesn't have backwards compatibility. Never, because such a concept makes no sense in the context of computer games. Given that a Xbox One is basically a PC with an operating system, and given that Xbox Live is essentially Steam, why don't they just sell Xbox 360 games on Xbox Live which can be downloaded on Xbox One? Then the whole notion of backward compatibility would simply cease to be, like on Steam. Seeing as Xbox One and the 360 have different hardware it would be very difficult to just allow 360 games to be played on the new one. The games wouldn't run very well, if at all, on the new one since the code for the 360 games were written for that exact hardware, not the one they're using now. They could simulate it through software but that is a slow and painful process, often requiring to put in code for each game instead of code that works for all. Strangely enough older PC games work just fine on new graphics cards. Not the same thing. The 360 and the new one are using different ways of processing things. It's not just new hardware, it's a different architecture. Don't kid yourself. If they wanted, for sure they would be able to make it backwards compatible. It is all for more marketing and money-grubbing. The PCs you use to play games on use x86 architecture to process things, the 360 used something else called PowerPC from IBM. They're completely different ways of processing data meaning you have to code differently to make things work. You could put in extra hardware to make it compatible but that is expensive and takes up extra space. You could also simulate it through software like emulators do but that is also expensive and takes time. Even if you do go through the trouble of writing this emulator you often have to write code for individual games instead of just code that works for all. I am not sure on all of these details but it's not so simple as they're JUST greedy fucks out to get the most of your wallets. I don't disagree, but the primary intent for this is just greedy money-grubbing scheme. There wont be many amazing games for consoles the first year or so. So if you want to play all those great games, you have to buy the older console. I am not contesting the fact that they are greedy bastards but you guys are making it seem like they only have to push a button to let you play 360 games on the new one.
Well, all those 'introduced features' speak what they are actually thinking.
Kinect required - check
Used games will be compromised - check
We don't need internet, or do we? - check
Games bound to account - check
Xbox live fee still there - check
Promote 'their' TV features through partner providers - check.
Partnership for DLC exclusives - check
No backwards compatibility - check.
|
On May 22 2013 20:43 Purpose88 wrote:Show nested quote +On May 22 2013 19:19 paralleluniverse wrote:Tell me specifically what gaming feature is missing. More TV features != less gaming features. Do americans really still watch that much TV? Here in germany TV is like radio - its basically dead. Its only used for big sport-events. I don't watch any shows/movies or news on TV anymore for like 5 years.
Hmm same, I practically only watch it for big sport events that are shown for free on TV and that you have to pay for on the internet(I don't pay for sports because there's free streams). It still is nice for watching movies with the whole family etc. of course.
Also apparently it's a "8-core AMD APU". I have no idea how that's supposed to not blow for gaming. Cannot wait for specs.
|
On May 22 2013 20:43 Purpose88 wrote:Show nested quote +On May 22 2013 19:19 paralleluniverse wrote:Tell me specifically what gaming feature is missing. More TV features != less gaming features. Do americans really still watch that much TV? Here in germany TV is like radio - its basically dead. Its only used for big sport-events. I don't watch any shows/movies or news on TV anymore for like 5 years.
You are not the whole population. You couldn't be more wrong.
|
On May 22 2013 20:44 NightOfTheDead wrote:Show nested quote +On May 22 2013 20:39 Aldehyde wrote:On May 22 2013 20:35 NightOfTheDead wrote:On May 22 2013 20:32 Aldehyde wrote:On May 22 2013 20:28 NightOfTheDead wrote:On May 22 2013 20:26 Aldehyde wrote:On May 22 2013 20:22 Shikyo wrote:On May 22 2013 20:17 Aldehyde wrote:On May 22 2013 19:06 paralleluniverse wrote:On May 22 2013 18:50 Nekovivie wrote:
I really dont understand why you would design it to not have backwards compatibility. Theres a lot of great 360 games that will never get played now, because not many people are going to buy a 360 who doesn't already have one. They'll buy the latest console. I also don't understand why it doesn't have backwards compatibility, but not in the usual sense. What I really don't understand is why the concept of "backwards compatibility" isn't extinct yet. When's the last time someone announced that a digital games platform like Steam doesn't have backwards compatibility. Never, because such a concept makes no sense in the context of computer games. Given that a Xbox One is basically a PC with an operating system, and given that Xbox Live is essentially Steam, why don't they just sell Xbox 360 games on Xbox Live which can be downloaded on Xbox One? Then the whole notion of backward compatibility would simply cease to be, like on Steam. Seeing as Xbox One and the 360 have different hardware it would be very difficult to just allow 360 games to be played on the new one. The games wouldn't run very well, if at all, on the new one since the code for the 360 games were written for that exact hardware, not the one they're using now. They could simulate it through software but that is a slow and painful process, often requiring to put in code for each game instead of code that works for all. Strangely enough older PC games work just fine on new graphics cards. Not the same thing. The 360 and the new one are using different ways of processing things. It's not just new hardware, it's a different architecture. Don't kid yourself. If they wanted, for sure they would be able to make it backwards compatible. It is all for more marketing and money-grubbing. The PCs you use to play games on use x86 architecture to process things, the 360 used something else called PowerPC from IBM. They're completely different ways of processing data meaning you have to code differently to make things work. You could put in extra hardware to make it compatible but that is expensive and takes up extra space. You could also simulate it through software like emulators do but that is also expensive and takes time. Even if you do go through the trouble of writing this emulator you often have to write code for individual games instead of just code that works for all. I am not sure on all of these details but it's not so simple as they're JUST greedy fucks out to get the most of your wallets. I don't disagree, but the primary intent for this is just greedy money-grubbing scheme. There wont be many amazing games for consoles the first year or so. So if you want to play all those great games, you have to buy the older console. I am not contesting the fact that they are greedy bastards but you guys are making it seem like they only have to push a button to let you play 360 games on the new one. Well, all those 'introduced features' speak what they are actually thinking. Kinect required - check Used games will be compromised - check We don't need internet, or do we? - check Games bound to account - check Xbox live fee still there - check Promote 'their' TV features through partner providers - check. Partnership for DLC exclusives - check No backwards compatibility - check.
What is your point? I was agreeing with you.
Both the PS4 and this Xbox One (terrible piece of shit name btw) are completely underwhelming at this point. Maybe one of them can wow me over at some point but as it stands now, I won't be getting a new console.
|
On May 22 2013 20:45 Shikyo wrote:Show nested quote +On May 22 2013 20:43 Purpose88 wrote:On May 22 2013 19:19 paralleluniverse wrote:Tell me specifically what gaming feature is missing. More TV features != less gaming features. Do americans really still watch that much TV? Here in germany TV is like radio - its basically dead. Its only used for big sport-events. I don't watch any shows/movies or news on TV anymore for like 5 years. Also apparently it's a "8-core AMD APU". I have no idea how that's supposed to not blow for gaming. Cannot wait for specs.
Which is what the PS4 is going for as well (I think?). Might be we finally get to see some decent multicore performance in games.
|
I dislike the idea of having a microphone and camera that never turns off and is always connected to the internet in my house 24/7. Will not buy for this sole fact alone.
|
On May 22 2013 20:39 Aldehyde wrote:Show nested quote +On May 22 2013 20:35 NightOfTheDead wrote:On May 22 2013 20:32 Aldehyde wrote:On May 22 2013 20:28 NightOfTheDead wrote:On May 22 2013 20:26 Aldehyde wrote:On May 22 2013 20:22 Shikyo wrote:On May 22 2013 20:17 Aldehyde wrote:On May 22 2013 19:06 paralleluniverse wrote:On May 22 2013 18:50 Nekovivie wrote:
I really dont understand why you would design it to not have backwards compatibility. Theres a lot of great 360 games that will never get played now, because not many people are going to buy a 360 who doesn't already have one. They'll buy the latest console. I also don't understand why it doesn't have backwards compatibility, but not in the usual sense. What I really don't understand is why the concept of "backwards compatibility" isn't extinct yet. When's the last time someone announced that a digital games platform like Steam doesn't have backwards compatibility. Never, because such a concept makes no sense in the context of computer games. Given that a Xbox One is basically a PC with an operating system, and given that Xbox Live is essentially Steam, why don't they just sell Xbox 360 games on Xbox Live which can be downloaded on Xbox One? Then the whole notion of backward compatibility would simply cease to be, like on Steam. Seeing as Xbox One and the 360 have different hardware it would be very difficult to just allow 360 games to be played on the new one. The games wouldn't run very well, if at all, on the new one since the code for the 360 games were written for that exact hardware, not the one they're using now. They could simulate it through software but that is a slow and painful process, often requiring to put in code for each game instead of code that works for all. Strangely enough older PC games work just fine on new graphics cards. Not the same thing. The 360 and the new one are using different ways of processing things. It's not just new hardware, it's a different architecture. Don't kid yourself. If they wanted, for sure they would be able to make it backwards compatible. It is all for more marketing and money-grubbing. The PCs you use to play games on use x86 architecture to process things, the 360 used something else called PowerPC from IBM. They're completely different ways of processing data meaning you have to code differently to make things work. You could put in extra hardware to make it compatible but that is expensive and takes up extra space. You could also simulate it through software like emulators do but that is also expensive and takes time. Even if you do go through the trouble of writing this emulator you often have to write code for individual games instead of just code that works for all. I am not sure on all of these details but it's not so simple as they're JUST greedy fucks out to get the most of your wallets. I don't disagree, but the primary intent for this is just greedy money-grubbing scheme. There wont be many amazing games for consoles the first year or so. So if you want to play all those great games, you have to buy the older console. I am not contesting the fact that they are greedy bastards but you guys are making it seem like they only have to push a button to let you play 360 games on the new one.
yes... that's exactly what they have to do. Everything is based in windows tech, they only need the drive to be able to read the data, and they can do it
|
On May 22 2013 21:01 czylu wrote:Show nested quote +On May 22 2013 20:39 Aldehyde wrote:On May 22 2013 20:35 NightOfTheDead wrote:On May 22 2013 20:32 Aldehyde wrote:On May 22 2013 20:28 NightOfTheDead wrote:On May 22 2013 20:26 Aldehyde wrote:On May 22 2013 20:22 Shikyo wrote:On May 22 2013 20:17 Aldehyde wrote:On May 22 2013 19:06 paralleluniverse wrote:On May 22 2013 18:50 Nekovivie wrote:
I really dont understand why you would design it to not have backwards compatibility. Theres a lot of great 360 games that will never get played now, because not many people are going to buy a 360 who doesn't already have one. They'll buy the latest console. I also don't understand why it doesn't have backwards compatibility, but not in the usual sense. What I really don't understand is why the concept of "backwards compatibility" isn't extinct yet. When's the last time someone announced that a digital games platform like Steam doesn't have backwards compatibility. Never, because such a concept makes no sense in the context of computer games. Given that a Xbox One is basically a PC with an operating system, and given that Xbox Live is essentially Steam, why don't they just sell Xbox 360 games on Xbox Live which can be downloaded on Xbox One? Then the whole notion of backward compatibility would simply cease to be, like on Steam. Seeing as Xbox One and the 360 have different hardware it would be very difficult to just allow 360 games to be played on the new one. The games wouldn't run very well, if at all, on the new one since the code for the 360 games were written for that exact hardware, not the one they're using now. They could simulate it through software but that is a slow and painful process, often requiring to put in code for each game instead of code that works for all. Strangely enough older PC games work just fine on new graphics cards. Not the same thing. The 360 and the new one are using different ways of processing things. It's not just new hardware, it's a different architecture. Don't kid yourself. If they wanted, for sure they would be able to make it backwards compatible. It is all for more marketing and money-grubbing. The PCs you use to play games on use x86 architecture to process things, the 360 used something else called PowerPC from IBM. They're completely different ways of processing data meaning you have to code differently to make things work. You could put in extra hardware to make it compatible but that is expensive and takes up extra space. You could also simulate it through software like emulators do but that is also expensive and takes time. Even if you do go through the trouble of writing this emulator you often have to write code for individual games instead of just code that works for all. I am not sure on all of these details but it's not so simple as they're JUST greedy fucks out to get the most of your wallets. I don't disagree, but the primary intent for this is just greedy money-grubbing scheme. There wont be many amazing games for consoles the first year or so. So if you want to play all those great games, you have to buy the older console. I am not contesting the fact that they are greedy bastards but you guys are making it seem like they only have to push a button to let you play 360 games on the new one. yes... that's exactly what they have to do. Everything is based in windows tech, they only need the drive to be able to read the data, and they can do it
That's news to me. I suppose it's only a matter of seconds until we can play 360 games on PC then.
|
On May 22 2013 20:29 Shikyo wrote:Show nested quote +On May 22 2013 20:26 Aldehyde wrote:On May 22 2013 20:22 Shikyo wrote:On May 22 2013 20:17 Aldehyde wrote:On May 22 2013 19:06 paralleluniverse wrote:On May 22 2013 18:50 Nekovivie wrote:
I really dont understand why you would design it to not have backwards compatibility. Theres a lot of great 360 games that will never get played now, because not many people are going to buy a 360 who doesn't already have one. They'll buy the latest console. I also don't understand why it doesn't have backwards compatibility, but not in the usual sense. What I really don't understand is why the concept of "backwards compatibility" isn't extinct yet. When's the last time someone announced that a digital games platform like Steam doesn't have backwards compatibility. Never, because such a concept makes no sense in the context of computer games. Given that a Xbox One is basically a PC with an operating system, and given that Xbox Live is essentially Steam, why don't they just sell Xbox 360 games on Xbox Live which can be downloaded on Xbox One? Then the whole notion of backward compatibility would simply cease to be, like on Steam. Seeing as Xbox One and the 360 have different hardware it would be very difficult to just allow 360 games to be played on the new one. The games wouldn't run very well, if at all, on the new one since the code for the 360 games were written for that exact hardware, not the one they're using now. They could simulate it through software but that is a slow and painful process, often requiring to put in code for each game instead of code that works for all. Strangely enough older PC games work just fine on new graphics cards. Not the same thing. The 360 and the new one are using different ways of processing things. It's not just new hardware, it's a different architecture. Aren't both manufactured by AMD? PC games work just fine even on graphics cards by completely different companies *Gasp* PS1 games work just fine on PS2 *Gasp*
You know nothing of internal hardware on consoles and how the software is built around them to work.
edit: But just in case you're actually interested in learning something. The reason why consoles have been able to somewhat keep up with modern graphics, even though the hardware is long outdated, is because the games are built around the hardware to work on that exactly. They know exactly how much ram and cpu power they got to work with, and the games are optimized as such. Games on PC on the other hand needs to work on any hardware a computer could possibly have. The games are not optimized for the specific hardware, but its all ok because computers generally are up to date.
What this means for consoles is that when a new one comes around, especially one with completely different internal hardware than the predecessor, which is the case for both PS4 and X1, earlier games built for another system can't physically be played without an emulator. Emulators are possible, but take up 100x the power required for the system you're trying to emulate to begin with. To put this in perspective, ps3 emulators still doesn't really work that well on a high end computer today.
The other way to be backwards compatible is by putting the hardware for ps3 inside the ps4. I believe this was done for the early ps3 models (such as mine, which can actually play ps2 games), but it ends up costing a lot more. I still think they should do a limited edition of such a console, so people would know why exactly they are paying more. But the general all consumer one can't have it if they plan on being competitive.
The third way, which Sony has stated they will pursue with the ps4, is backwards compatibility through online streaming. The downside of this is that it will require a constant Internet connection (obviously), and even well known streaming services such as OnLive still can't really shake off that small input lag you get. But the technology is being worked on, and I believe this will work fine in the future.
|
On May 22 2013 20:45 Shikyo wrote:Show nested quote +On May 22 2013 20:43 Purpose88 wrote:On May 22 2013 19:19 paralleluniverse wrote:Tell me specifically what gaming feature is missing. More TV features != less gaming features. Do americans really still watch that much TV? Here in germany TV is like radio - its basically dead. Its only used for big sport-events. I don't watch any shows/movies or news on TV anymore for like 5 years. Hmm same, I practically only watch it for big sport events that are shown for free on TV and that you have to pay for on the internet(I don't pay for sports because there's free streams). It still is nice for watching movies with the whole family etc. of course. Also apparently it's a "8-core AMD APU". I have no idea how that's supposed to not blow for gaming. Cannot wait for specs.
The specs aren't looking good for XBOX. It will have:
- almost same cpu as PS4 (both use AMD Jaguar)
- 8GB of DDR3 (compared to DDR5 for PS4)
- 1.2 TFLOPS AMD GPU (PS4 has 1.84 TFLOPS one)
The GPU is a estimate based on MS PR mambo-jumbo about 5mld transistors in the XBOX One. Looks good on paper but 1.2mld of those transistors are used by 32MB of ESRAM in this SoC.
So its losing on all fronts. No wonder MS stocks had a small drop and Sony's raised
|
On May 22 2013 20:59 pjw wrote:
I dislike the idea of having a microphone and camera that never turns off and is always connected to the internet in my house 24/7. Will not buy for this sole fact alone.
Meh you could always just open the console and disconnect them if it bothered you that much.
|
On May 22 2013 20:43 Purpose88 wrote:Show nested quote +On May 22 2013 19:19 paralleluniverse wrote:Tell me specifically what gaming feature is missing. More TV features != less gaming features. Do americans really still watch that much TV? Here in germany TV is like radio - its basically dead. Its only used for big sport-events. I don't watch any shows/movies or news on TV anymore for like 5 years.
No. TV is worthless. But TV shows are great.
|
On May 22 2013 21:37 Nekovivie wrote:Show nested quote +On May 22 2013 20:59 pjw wrote:
I dislike the idea of having a microphone and camera that never turns off and is always connected to the internet in my house 24/7. Will not buy for this sole fact alone. Meh you could always just open the console and disconnect them if it bothered you that much.
The Kinect 2 is required for the XBOne to work.
Also, this article contains the most clear statement I've found regarding the used games issue: http://www.vg247.com/2013/05/22/xbox-one-harrison-sheds-light-on-pre-owned-fees-always-online/
So, yeah, third party used game sales and rentals are down the tube unless you feel like paying the license fee for your used copy. They still haven't detailed what their system will be for handling digital used sales.
I hope you don't rely on Gamefly or trade-in credits at Gamestop, though.
|
I think these new consoles are really gonna fail. The reason xbox 360 and ps3 were successful is that consumers wanted much better graphics. Is it going to be THAT much better with these new consoles and worth the price? I don't think so.
However, the economy picking up could give them a strong launch... hmm
|
On May 22 2013 21:39 paralleluniverse wrote:Show nested quote +On May 22 2013 20:43 Purpose88 wrote:On May 22 2013 19:19 paralleluniverse wrote:Tell me specifically what gaming feature is missing. More TV features != less gaming features. Do americans really still watch that much TV? Here in germany TV is like radio - its basically dead. Its only used for big sport-events. I don't watch any shows/movies or news on TV anymore for like 5 years. No. TV is worthless. But TV shows are great.
I don't have stats to back me up, but I am absolutely sure TV is still completely alive (in Germany at least). Of course I personally don't watch it, but every normal person does. When people are bored they surf the internet or watch TV. Most people still watch TV in that position.
Germany still has a bunch of purely German channels, every series, every movie dubbed in German etc.
And the xbox looks really uninteresting. Guess it's gonna take 10 more console generations until the general public realizes that PC is just like a console except better in everything.
|
On May 22 2013 20:59 pjw wrote:
I dislike the idea of having a microphone and camera that never turns off and is always connected to the internet in my house 24/7. Will not buy for this sole fact alone.
But I liked your stream...
|
On May 22 2013 21:45 Dyme wrote:Show nested quote +On May 22 2013 21:39 paralleluniverse wrote:On May 22 2013 20:43 Purpose88 wrote:On May 22 2013 19:19 paralleluniverse wrote:Tell me specifically what gaming feature is missing. More TV features != less gaming features. Do americans really still watch that much TV? Here in germany TV is like radio - its basically dead. Its only used for big sport-events. I don't watch any shows/movies or news on TV anymore for like 5 years. No. TV is worthless. But TV shows are great. I don't have stats to back me up, but I am absolutely sure TV is still completely alive (in Germany at least). Of course I personally don't watch it, but every normal person does. When people are bored they surf the internet or watch TV. Most people still watch TV in that position. Germany still has a bunch of purely German channels, every series, every movie dubbed in German etc. And the xbox looks really uninteresting. Guess it's gonna take 10 more console generations until the general public realizes that PC is just like a console except better in everything.
Why would anyone watch a TV-Show on TV? Good shows like Breaking Bad or Game of Thrones I just download and watch them on my PC, like every one should. I could not watch these shows with a Adbreak and you have to pay extra to watch them (in HD), if you have a HD-TV.
On PC its all free and you can watch everything when you like to and not when the schedule says so!
The only reason for me to keep my 15yo CRT-TV is to watch a little bit of Football or Formula 1 from time to time. But I can't imagine anyone under 40 would choose watching terrible TV over a PC.
|
On May 22 2013 21:57 Purpose88 wrote:+ Show Spoiler +On May 22 2013 21:45 Dyme wrote:Show nested quote +On May 22 2013 21:39 paralleluniverse wrote:On May 22 2013 20:43 Purpose88 wrote:On May 22 2013 19:19 paralleluniverse wrote:Tell me specifically what gaming feature is missing. More TV features != less gaming features. Do americans really still watch that much TV? Here in germany TV is like radio - its basically dead. Its only used for big sport-events. I don't watch any shows/movies or news on TV anymore for like 5 years. No. TV is worthless. But TV shows are great. I don't have stats to back me up, but I am absolutely sure TV is still completely alive (in Germany at least). Of course I personally don't watch it, but every normal person does. When people are bored they surf the internet or watch TV. Most people still watch TV in that position. Germany still has a bunch of purely German channels, every series, every movie dubbed in German etc. And the xbox looks really uninteresting. Guess it's gonna take 10 more console generations until the general public realizes that PC is just like a console except better in everything. Why would anyone watch a TV-Show on TV? Good shows like Breaking Bad or Game of Thrones I just download and watch them on my PC, like every one should. I could not watch these shows with a Adbreak and you have to pay extra to watch them (in HD), if you have a HD-TV. On PC its all free and you can watch everything when you like to and not when the schedule says so! + Show Spoiler +The only reason for me to keep my 15yo CRT-TV is to watch a little bit of Football or Formula 1 from time to time. But I can't imagine anyone under 40 would choose watching terrible TV over a PC.
Cause piracy is always the way to go, yay!
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
