PS4 vs. Xbox One: Does Sony already have the advantage?

[LoudClearVoice]

With news of the new consoles from Sony and Microsoft coming out by year's end, there's already been hype and disappoint from both sides.

I found this interesting opinion piece in which the author thinks Sony has a great opportunity to gain a big advantage over Xbox One by getting simpler rather than more complex:

The Xbox One Might Let Sony's PS4 Win By Default

Last night, Microsoft dumped a pile of information into our laps about some of the more controversial specifics of the Xbox One. We heard confirmation about its practices for always on, used game resale, and game ownership in general. Some of the highlights:

- Your Xbox must check in via the internet once every 24 hours, if not, you won’t be able to play games

- It is up to publishers whether or not you can resell your games or gift them to friends


- Discs have nothing to do with ownership, and are only use for installation purposes. Games are simply licensed now

As I read through this list and the expected internet outrage that followed, I had to wonder what Sony must be making of all this.

There are two options for Sony and the Playstation 4. They can march arm in arm with Microsoft backwards in time with practices that actually make gaming less accessible and fun, or reject all of it and possibly win the next console war before it’s even started.

Sony has been eerily silent about all of these issues to date, at least in any official capacity. Yes, in interviews they’ve given us supposed comforts like “no, the PS4 doesn’t need to be always on,” or “yes, the PS4 plays used games.” But both of those things don’t mean what they used to. You might also say given this new information that the Xbox One isn’t ALWAYS on, but it does have to be connected to the internet once a day. Microsoft will say even people with unstable internet can manage that, right? You could say the Xbox One DOES play used games, but “used games” does not mean what it once did because of everything simply being licensed now. So what’s Sony talking about here? I’m not convinced we can say for sure yet.

The truth is we don’t know the full scope of Sony’s plans, despite what they’ve said in interviews so far. The definition of always on and used games have changed so drastically, a sentence or two about either isn’t enough of an explanation. I don’t think we can officially rule out that Sony could have similar policies to Microsoft, in some form or another, but we can hope that isn’t the case.

Sony needs to be learning from what’s happening with the Xbox One right now. The console, as it exists, simply has more cons than pros at this point, something that is almost unfathomable for a new system. It used to be a lot more simple. This is a new video game console. It will play better looking versions of all your favorite games, and give you some cool new ones too. Buy it.

And people did.

But what if all the new features actually became reasons not to buy a new console instead? Yes, it still promises better games, but there are a ton of caveats attached now. In order to access these games, you must put up with a laundry list of restrictions like the ones listed above. Something that’s supposed to be a benefit, the Kinect, is now being seen as an almost Orwellian listening device that much be attached to the console at all times.

So really, what are the selling points for the Xbox One at this point? There are its TV tuning abilities via Kinect control, but as cool as those were in the reveal demo, when you really sat down and thought about it, are you wasting that much time pressing the “input” button on your remote control? Is this solving a problem that actually exists? I don’t believe so.

So what we’re really left with is games, and we haven’t seen many so far. Microsoft’s two big staple franchises are Halo and Gears of War, and I would argue those are the only two that could actually sell systems on their own. The rest of its top titles are shared with Sony, even Call of Duty, though Microsoft seemed to forget that when they made it the grand finale of their Xbox One announcement. They couldn’t even keep Bungie around, and that studio’s next blockbuster, Destiny, is being showcased at the PS4 event during E3.

All of this leaves Sony in a very unique position. If they simply stick with the tenants of the video game industry that have been the norm for years, offline play, used game selling/buying and physical game ownership, they could see a large amount of Microsoft loyalists flood to the PS4 simply because they want a console that can play games easily and without restriction. They’d only have to sacrifice a handful of exclusives to do so. Sony could even promote digital distribution for those who like the convenience, so long as they kept physical discs as an option when it comes to game ownership.

I own both a PS3 and an Xbox 360, and have been called a fanboy of both brands at one time or another. But given the current state of things, the Playstation 4 appears to be shaping up to be the better gaming machine. Sony’s exclusives are more numerous and generally of higher quality than Microsoft’s. Sony touted their technical specs in their reveal while Microsoft masked theirs with mumbo jumbo, implying Sony may have the more powerful machine.

Rather, Microsoft’s ace in the hole was supposed to be that the Xbox One was a glorious “entertainment box.” A revolutionary device that everyone would want to have in their living room. But so far, we haven’t seen it do anything that a combination of a cable box and a PS4 can’t do, other than adding gesture and voice control. Perhaps there are more aspects to it we haven’t seen, but being able to switch inputs by talking to your TV or seeing your fantasy sports stats onscreen is not enough to declare an entertainment revolution.

When it’s all said and done, if Sony rejects the sorts of policies that Microsoft officially put forth last night, they might win the console war, at least in the near future. I have a hard time believing that many people will buy an Xbox One over a PS4 simply to play Halo and Gears of War, or for Kinect’s TV tie-in abilities. And even those advantages might be dramatically outweighed by the internet connection and game ownership policies that so many have claimed to despise.

I don’t know if Sony will seize on this opportunity. It might be too late, and the system has simply been designed to work similar to the way the Xbox One does. In that case, if the two systems end up having more or less the same policies, then it’s just going to be a free-for-all where consumers have two pretty similar choices in front of them, sort of like this past generation. Only this time, consumers will lose as both major companies have colluded in order to eliminate true game ownership or the ability to play offline. Should that happen, maybe Nintendo might finally see some wind in the Wii U’s sales, provided it’s released any worthwhile games by then. Perhaps we haven’t given Nintendo enough credit for staying true to the traditional practices of old.

At this point, the Xbox One seems to be fumbling so badly, it almost seems like Sony would be remiss to not seize on the opportunity. Microsoft’s steps forward appear as backward movement to many, and Sony could win by simply standing still and watching its biggest competitor sink under its own weight. Or they may tie their fortunes together, and it will be the consumers who drown in higher prices and obtrusive restrictions.

Both companies are staying mum until E3 now. I guess we’ll just have to wait and see.

http://www.forbes.com/sites/insertc...et-sonys-ps4-win-by-default/?partner=yahootix

From my perspective, I agree with this guy. I think there seem to be too many cons and too many "hurdles" with the Xbox One. Most of what I've heard from serious gamers has been negative, in terms of their thoughts so far regarding Xbox One. Now, let's all remember, most of this is rumor and it's a little unfair to pass judgment now.

I used to play a lot of video games as a kid (Sega Genesis and SNES were big when I was in middle school and then Playstation in high school).

I played PS2 and the newer systems in college but I wouldn't classify myself as a hardcore gamer. I'd play many different types of games by myself or with others. I had friends that all they did is play these games. Anyway, I got too busy with school and then graduate school that I didn't have time for video games and I kinda lost interest. I have bought an Xbox360 and a few games several years ago but I almost never play.

Now, I kinda want to jump back in to video games but to be honest, I'm scared. From the outside looking in, it looks way, way too complex to just sit down and play. I think that is what this article is getting at. Gamers like me will be intimidated by having to go online, set up accounts, download updates, etc. etc. While Xbox One might appeal to the hardcore gamers, people that want to just sit down and play won't like it and that's where Sony's chance is. Sony can still make their system appeal to hardcore gamers but they can simplify a lot of it so that the 'average' or even 'beginner' can take it out of the box, plug it in and play.

I know there are some serious gamers here. What do you all think of this author's piece above and the future of these two systems?

 

[Poop Master Flex]

Sony's got this generation in the bag if I was to make an educated guess. There are things that Sony did this year that I thought was a great idea. I love the fact that a lot of their new features aren't necessarily upgrades but novel ideas that are just plain SMART (No load times).

XBoxOne from what I've seen doesn't have anything that really pops out as "must buy". Of course this could all change as at the end of the day the games on each system greatly affect system sales but based on consoles alone it can't touch the PS4. Usability is all PS4 in my eyes.

Unless XBoxOne can get some really good exclusive titles I don't see them winning this battle.

 

[The Butcher]

I'll let the serious gamers (bit of an oxymoron, ain't it?) debate all the minutiae. For me, ever since I was about 14 years old, it's just been about the games and the price. That was also around the time that I ended my tour of duty in the console wars. Once "bits" ceased to matter, so did my passion to argue which system is better.

I've got the internet. If a game console requires an internet connection, I'm good to go. If my internet goes down, I'll go outside and ride my bike or dust off my 3DO and play FIFA International Soccer. I don't rent games anymore and rarely (like once in the last year) trade or borrow games. I can live without buying used games. What I'm saying is that nothing that the Xbox One proposes to do will greatly affect my gaming experience-- at least so far as I can tell right now.

Bottom line for me is whichever system has a better lineup of games coupled with a competitive price point will win my business. If neither tickles my fancy, then there are a bajillon games for the 9 game systems I already own that I haven't played. If these new systems are just a mess of DRM issues and HAL 9000-esque "I can't let you do that" problems, then my gaming future may lie in the past.

 

[Loveless]

If Microsoft go ahead with these restrictions and Sony don't, XboxOne is dead in the water. Not only would their market abandon them, but why would the game shops even stock their product? Over here, the game shops are reliant on the 2nd hand market to keep them afloat, they don't earn shit from new sales.
I have to imagine Microsoft know Sony are going to do exactly the same thing, otherwise this move would be suicidal.

 

[LoudClearVoice]

If Microsoft go ahead with these restrictions and Sony don't, XboxOne is dead in the water. Not only would their market abandon them, but why would the game shops even stock their product? Over here, the game shops are reliant on the 2nd hand market to keep them afloat, they don't earn shit from new sales.
I have to imagine Microsoft know Sony are going to do exactly the same thing, otherwise this move would be suicidal.

Good point about Microsoft "knowing" what Sony is going to do. However, I think it's interesting that Sony hasn't really said anything or commented on these features Microsoft is supposedly offering. Sony might be looking at the negative reactions and they could be retooling some things, especially if they were planning on the same things as Microsoft.

I can't see how anyone would actually like the things Microsoft is allegedly going to do (according to this article) although as I mentioned, I'm not a sophisticated gamer so some of this stuff might actually be cool or important to the hardcore gamers. I don't know.

 

[The Butcher]

I can't see how anyone would actually like the things Microsoft is allegedly going to do (according to this article) although as I mentioned, I'm not a sophisticated gamer so some of this stuff might actually be cool or important to the hardcore gamers. I don't know.

The way I see it it's something to bitch about. DRM, cloud gaming, the fight against used software, etc. aren't going away, especially when consumers seemingly have no control over their wallets. Microsoft could say that the Xbox One will require a blood sample to power on, and people will still trample each other to get one. I'll be very surprised if both systems aren't big successes. Both have large install bases, both have loyal fans, and both will have features that will piss people off until folks actually play them and realize they're just another game console.

 

[Loveless]

A little more information and it's not quite such bad news for users, though it might be bad for retailers. Trade-ins will be allowed but only with licensed retailers. To me that sounds like code for "We're going to charge the retailers for the licence". You'll also be able to swap games with your friends, once. The machine is still completely useless if you don't have a net connection though.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/technology-22812743

 

[LoudClearVoice]

A little more information and it's not quite such bad news for users, though it might be bad for retailers. Trade-ins will be allowed but only with licensed retailers. To me that sounds like code for "We're going to charge the retailers for the licence". You'll also be able to swap games with your friends, once. The machine is still completely useless if you don't have a net connection though.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/technology-22812743

Good info. Again, it will be interesting to see what Sony does in this regard. They could jump on board and figure, "if they're charging retailers for the licenses, so will we" or they could NOT extra for stores to sell games/licenses and this would create an interesting dynamic in that, retailers would likely push the Sony games and system over anything for Xbox that they'd have to pay extra for.

 

[Wally Dangerously]

If all of this is true about the XBox One, there's no way in hell I'm buying one.

I reject the idea of requiring gamers to "check in" every 24 hours for verification. That's just bullshit. Plus, if you don't have internet access, you're completely screwed. Also, if I purchase a game, I should be able to sell it, trade it, give it away, or wipe my ass with it if I want. Once I complete games, I give them to my cousin's 11 year-old son to play. Now, I may not be able to do that.

This is a really dumb move by Microsoft and I think they're going to be hearing from a lot of pissed-off gamers. What's next, will the CIA, FBI, NSA, and other government agencies be monitoring our gaming activity too? After all, we all know that those darn violent games contribute to a culture of violence

 

[lenguy]

I reject the idea of requiring gamers to "check in" every 24 hours for verification. That's just bullshit.

I don't see the huge issue here. Why is it such "bullshit" to just check in every 24 hours? Its such a fickle and petty feature that will take you a whole 5 seconds and you're finished. Hardly such a thing to get so worked up about.

Plus, if you don't have internet access, you're completely screwed.

Yeah, this might be a problem for some people, not me though, doesn't effect me. The way I see it, if you don't have internet or any access to it then I doubt you would be able to afford a $400 plus gaming console.

Also, if I purchase a game, I should be able to sell it, trade it, give it away, or wipe my ass with it if I want. Once I complete games, I give them to my cousin's 11 year-old son to play. Now, I may not be able to do that.

Well, by all rights..you can choose to wipe your ass with it, nothing stopping you from doing that.

From Xbox.com "Microsoft Studios will enable you to give your games to friends or trade in your Xbox One games at participating retailers. Third party publishers may opt in or out of supporting game resale and may set up business terms or transfer fees with retailers," So yes, you can still do that. There are, certain restrictions but you can still trade them in or license them over to a friend.

This is a really dumb move by Microsoft and I think they're going to be hearing from a lot of pissed-off gamers. What's next, will the CIA, FBI, NSA, and other government agencies be monitoring our gaming activity too? After all, we all know that those darn violent games contribute to a culture of violence

Fact. A lot of gamers are genuinely pissed off. See this is just it. People see the world around them as static much of the time. Things should and forever remain the same. When this is far from the case. Gamers don't like the fact that nowadays, their consoles are capable of doing so much more than simply, just play games. They feel as if all that focus and all that attention that was once a beacon of shimmering light is now being shared by other media attentions.

Gamers act betrayed for some reason. How dare a company release a gaming console that doesn't chatter to me, the gamer! How dare it play movies! How dare it stream live T.V! How dare they! Why is a console that can do more than one thing so damn blasphemous? Remember when your cellphones could only make phone calls? My, how that has changed huh? There was no uproar from the Cellphone community when texting was introduced. No uproar from them when touchscreens were introduced. No uproar at the introductions of apps. People these days take all that for granted know, stuff a lot of them can`t live without.

For me, it not only makes sense that a console do more than just play games, it is only logical! This is what Microsoft understands. Instead of appealing to just one audience, why not appeal too many? The console will still play games...we act as if Microsoft is taking that feature from us, which is simply not true. Microsoft understands the concept of taking all your living room electronics and effectively combining it into one singular entertainment box, why is this such a sin? It really just is not. Having a singular devices that combines everything is not only highly efficient but it is just so damn sensible and will likely be the wave of things to come.

This is the direction society is taking people, 10 years from now, stuff like this will all probably be normal. As somebody said, this is the future of how gaming will work and Microsoft is not afraid to drag you kicking and screaming the entire way. Hell, do not act so surprised if Sony has similar policies heading our way for the PS4.

I don't really approve of some of the thing Microsoft is doing. Some of their policies are outrages, actually. I just have enough foresight to understand that this isn't going away and will very much likely be a big part of our future. But, who knows, perhaps I am wrong. Only time will tell.

 

[Slyfox696]

I don't see the huge issue here. Why is it such "bullshit" to just check in every 24 hours?

Aside from the obvious potential privacy issues, highlighted recently with the information about the NSA minining data from tech companies, not everyone has reliable Internet and without checking in every 24 hours, your Xbox is useless. Want to take that Xbox to the cabin in the woods for the weekend? Forget about it.

What's even more asinine is the fact the TV and movie player work just fine without checking in. How absurd is it that the game console will not play games, but it will play movies, without a connection within 24 hours? It's stupidity of the utmost extreme.

Fact. A lot of gamers are genuinely pissed off. See this is just it. People see the world around them as static much of the time. Things should and forever remain the same. When this is far from the case. Gamers don't like the fact that nowadays, their consoles are capable of doing so much more than simply, just play games. They feel as if all that focus and all that attention that was once a beacon of shimmering light is now being shared by other media attentions.

Except the entire purpose of a game console IS to play games. Game consoles are very much underpowered compared to PCs, but the advantage of them is games are specially designed for the specific console. But as consoles branch out into other avenues, with a declining focus on the actual gaming portion, why the fuck would I buy an underpowered PC at an equal price, to do what my PC has been able to do for years?

It's nonsense.


As you can tell, I most certainly will not be purchasing the Xbox. And if Sony pulls the same nonsense, then I won't buy a PS4 either. I want my game console to play games. I have a Blu-Ray player, I have a PC, I have all of these things...I don't need another product to do them, if it's just going to be an inferior product which requires an active connection.

Remember when your cellphones could only make phone calls? My, how that has changed huh? There was no uproar from the Cellphone community when texting was introduced. No uproar from them when touchscreens were introduced. No uproar at the introductions of apps. People these days take all that for granted know, stuff a lot of them can`t live without.

Yes, because those things added functionality we did not have previously. PCs are not mobile and game consoles cannot make phone calls. See the difference?

For me, it not only makes sense that a console do more than just play games, it is only logical! This is what Microsoft understands.

There's nothing wrong with a console doing more than playing games. What's wrong is crippling the game console from being able to play games.

This is what you don't understand.

The console will still play games

Unless you're in an area without a reliable Internet connection, like a hotel with unsecured Wi-Fi.

Microsoft understands the concept of taking all your living room electronics and effectively combining it into one singular entertainment box, why is this such a sin?

You act as if this is some grand revelation, as if it's never been thought of before.

Hell, do not act so surprised if Sony has similar policies heading our way for the PS4.

And they should not be surprised if I don't purchase it.

 

[Mighty NorCal]

WHichever is the better gaming console, will get my money. Period. To be honest, the whole "media hub" idea seems like...Well, kind of a given, as if that shoud be the next logical step to game consoles. So I was sorta left with a "so what?" feeling after all of that.

Then to proceed to tell me I HAVE to check in, and I HAVE to do this and that? Motherfucker, I am giving you MY money, you dont tell me I HAVE to do a god damned fucking thing. Sly's cabin in the woods example is perfect, since i have done that very thing numerous times.

I feel shamefu, because ive been an Xbox guy since day one. I may have to switch though, as I have no time for a bunch of regulations being put in place on my damn GAMING system.

 

[lenguy]

Aside from the obvious potential privacy issues, highlighted recently with the information about the NSA minining data from tech companies, not everyone has reliable Internet and without checking in every 24 hours, your Xbox is useless. Want to take that Xbox to the cabin in the woods for the weekend? Forget about it.

I think that people who own the console will have enough insight before hand to know their cabin in the woods has no internet. Therefore, coming to that conclusion, its enough to just say they would leave it at home...and find something else to do?? haha I don't know.

What's even more asinine is the fact the TV and movie player work just fine without checking in. How absurd is it that the game console will not play games, but it will play movies, without a connection within 24 hours? It's stupidity of the utmost extreme.

Like I said before. I don't support what Microsoft is doing. I agree with you. It is idiotic but I get that this is the way that its going to be and I have no choice but to either be apart of it or walk away.

Except the entire purpose of a game console IS to play games. Game consoles are very much underpowered compared to PCs, but the advantage of them is games are specially designed for the specific console. But as consoles branch out into other avenues, with a declining focus on the actual gaming portion, why the fuck would I buy an underpowered PC at an equal price, to do what my PC has been able to do for years?

I think the lines between what a gaming console is and should be is being ever more blurred with each generation. I know that the majority of people who go out and buy a Sony branded Playstation or a Microsoft branded Xbox or even a Nintendo console, purchase these items for the sole purpose of playing games. However, there is a small niche of people who buy these hardware devices because of the fact they can do multiple things. It is the reason my dad bought a PS3. He doesn't play games on it. He uses it for Blu-rays, Netflix and other video related outlets. I think that over the decade, this number will only increase.

I don't see how there is any sort of decline on the gaming portion of what a console does. If anything it expands on it even more. With things like DLC. Then you have things like Xbox arcade or things like the Wii virtual console that allows you to purchase more games through your console and play them through your console. There might be a decline in gaming quality but I wouldn't go so far there is a decline in the gaming portion of a consoles capabilities.

Yes, because those things added functionality we did not have previously. PCs are not mobile and game consoles cannot make phone calls. See the difference?

If you include Skype, then yes, I suppose it can make a call. What I meant was the principle fundamentals of what it meant for a phone to do all these things, being complete multitasking. Why can't there exist a box that can multitask like your phone does and is the center piece of your entertainment needs in your entertainment room? I was merely drawing the comparison from one device and how it went from doing one thing to essentially everything. Why can't a gaming system still offer this and keep the quality of gaming at a high? My phone can do many things but that doesn't mean I need to do them. I think its just the way Microsoft has approached things.

There's nothing wrong with a console doing more than playing games. What's wrong is crippling the game console from being able to play games.

It doesn't really cripple being able to play games but rather cripples how we share them. If you omit the always needing an internet connection fiasco that is.

Unless you're in an area without a reliable Internet connection, like a hotel with unsecured Wi-Fi.

Why would you take your console with you on a trip and set it up in a hotel anyway? Why lug something like that around? Maybe one should invest in a hand held devices instead. No, I understand what you are saying. No internet=you screwed. For me, this is hardly an issue. Sure for other people, maybeee not so good but for me its a non issue. If my internet goes out then shit, I suppose I'll go outside and ride a bike.

You act as if this is some grand revelation, as if it's never been thought of before.

I've realized this long ago. Its other people who act so betrayed by the thought of it. Seriously, people act as if Microsoft burned down their house and took all their possessions. I just angrily shrugged my shoulders.

And they should not be surprised if I don't purchase it.

I might get one, not sure. We'll see how the situation improves, or if it even does at all. People might call me a fool and a moron for buying one but whatever, I'd stand by my decision. I just want to play more Halo games lol. I rarely ever loan my games out and I rarely ever trade them in. I have a stable internet connection so I'm not worried.

I understand that people are angry and they are justified. This is a dark transition in gaming history. These kinds of things are always met with feelings of trepidation and skepticism but they almost always become industry standards and after a number of years pass, people just accept the changes. Even if they still do not agree with them. From my standpoint, from my perspective all of this does not effect me. I can buy this and happily continue my gaming needs. Others will surely disagree but again, this is just how I feel. We`ll see though, perhaps my stance will chance.

 

[M]

Microsoft's doing quite a good job at attempting to single-handedly crush the game industry by screwing over a bunch of the people who'd buy the console and making the entire gaming community hate it beyond anything I've ever seen before, so as long as the PS4 doesn't do that it's already got my money.

I'll run down the xbone in more detail later, but first an anecdote from yours truly:
I was actually considering buying the new xbox before its announcement, as so far i've only had sony and nintendo consoles and i'd like to finally be able to play halo without having to go over to a friend's house while also getting next gen games but it seems microsoft has pulled out all the stops to get me to buy a ps4 instead. I've got a second house where I've been slowly turning the bottom floor into a gaming area with surround sound, a big tv and a nice comfy couch. It's a pretty good set up actually. I was planning on getting the new xbox with all the halo games and chucking it down there so I could sit back and enjoy the halo campaigns at my own leisure. Now here's the problem; that house was built by my grandfather in the early 1970's and it is impossible to get good internet cables installed without tearing down half the house. It is now completely impossible for me to play the new xbox at all, as even though I was only going to get it for the single player halo campaigns i wouldn't be able to register the games to get the "permission" to play them, let alone be able to achieve the mandatory once a day connection test.

And all of that is assuming they even make a xbox one compatible re release of the halo games because apparently "If you're backwards compatible, you're really backwards." - Microsoft's Don Mattrick.

 

[LoudClearVoice]

Aside from the obvious potential privacy issues, highlighted recently with the information about the NSA minining data from tech companies, not everyone has reliable Internet and without checking in every 24 hours, your Xbox is useless. Want to take that Xbox to the cabin in the woods for the weekend? Forget about it.

What's even more asinine is the fact the TV and movie player work just fine without checking in. How absurd is it that the game console will not play games, but it will play movies, without a connection within 24 hours? It's stupidity of the utmost extreme.

Except the entire purpose of a game console IS to play games. Game consoles are very much underpowered compared to PCs, but the advantage of them is games are specially designed for the specific console. But as consoles branch out into other avenues, with a declining focus on the actual gaming portion, why the fuck would I buy an underpowered PC at an equal price, to do what my PC has been able to do for years?

It's nonsense.


As you can tell, I most certainly will not be purchasing the Xbox. And if Sony pulls the same nonsense, then I won't buy a PS4 either. I want my game console to play games. I have a Blu-Ray player, I have a PC, I have all of these things...I don't need another product to do them, if it's just going to be an inferior product which requires an active connection.

Yes, because those things added functionality we did not have previously. PCs are not mobile and game consoles cannot make phone calls. See the difference?

There's nothing wrong with a console doing more than playing games. What's wrong is crippling the game console from being able to play games.

This is what you don't understand.

Unless you're in an area without a reliable Internet connection, like a hotel with unsecured Wi-Fi.



You act as if this is some grand revelation, as if it's never been thought of before.

And they should not be surprised if I don't purchase it.

All great points here. In particular, you made a great point about the PC vs. game system aspect. Game consoles are much weaker than PCs but the advantage is that gaming is supposed to be so much easier and better on these systems. So, when the systems start to move closer and close towards being PCs, then what the fuck is the point of buying a "weak PC." There's nothing wrong with evolving with the times, within reason but to make so many hurdles, just to play the games, seems unfun to me.

My question too is, if they're simply giving gamers the "license" to play these games but technically not ownership, are they lowering the pricing of games to reflect that? To answer my own question: Probably not.

 

[Loveless]

Sony just won the console battle.

No 2nd hand game blocking
No DRM
No logging in required

Huge cheer from the E3 audience as that was announced.

 

[Slyfox696]

7:42 — This is utterly huge. A PS4 disc will function just like PS3 discs. Don’t need to be connected, can be traded, the whole shebang. This is a serious win for Sony in the hardcore gaming market. a lot of very specific digs at Microsoft here. This just got real.

7:40 — PS4 Supports Used Games! In clear, explicit terms. The crowd quite literally goes wild.

http://www.forbes.com/sites/davidthier/2013/06/10/liveblog-sonys-ps4-press-conference-at-e3-2013/


Excellent! I can now feel happy that my console decision has been made. And the Xbox could be in SERIOUS trouble. They better have a crack marketing team ready.

 

[Alastor]

My guess is EA made DRM ultimatums to the game consoles and only Microsoft buckled. I guess I can see how they are trying to get inroads on the tv ratings business with the media hub and kinect features. They forgot the reason some people buy these consoles over PCs is due to it being simpler. Pop disc in, ready to play. Nintendo basically won the current gen due to keeping it simple.

 

[Lee]

Peopel seem to miss that Sony announced you need to have PS+ to play online. Though Kingdom Hearts III will make me get a PS4.

I already own a WiiU and I think today we'll see the first party and people go 'oh yeah that's what Nintendo can do'.

 

[M]

http://www.forbes.com/sites/davidthier/2013/06/10/liveblog-sonys-ps4-press-conference-at-e3-2013/


Excellent! I can now feel happy that my console decision has been made. And the Xbox could be in SERIOUS trouble. They better have a crack marketing team ready.

Hmmmm, This part here is what I find most interesting about the used games thing from that link:

7:57 –to return to that idea of used games, it would appear that this is not, as I suspected,a publisher-led initiative, or Sony would have to be on board. So Microsoft is pursuing this unpopular strategy all on its own? Hard to figure why.

It's quite chilling to think about Microsoft wanting to do this while knowing very well that the public wouldn't like it....
Although Alastor's suggestion that EA made some form of ultimatums to them seems a pretty likely situation too, and it shows a lot about Microsoft potentially being very very scared of Sony this gen as why else would they need EA to be successful? They're more known as the Call of Duty console anyway, but it's probably the fear of Sony possibly getting something Microsoft wouldn't have that pushed them to this extreme.

Microsoft would probably know that the reason most people would buy the new xbox would be because they've got a 360 and it would just seem logical to them to buy the next installment - you'd be surprised to see the amount of people who are going to mindlessly buy it for that reason only. This would be fine and swell for them usually, but there just so happens to be another console coming out at the same time with a reputation of having more games and being better technically, AND this time they're also staking their claim for being the "gaming" console. What could Microsoft possibly do to combat this but to try and appeal everywhere else? They don't have much of a chance against Sony when it comes to pure gaming alone, so coming out and saying that they're going to be an all in one entertainment system instead of "just a console" would work as a logical buffer for their cause. The problem in that was the horrible, horrible execution of announcing it. It came across as them not caring about the gamers, and as a result the gamers showed their anguish towards them very vocally. Then there was the post announcement press meeting where all the hilarious restrictions were announced, that killed off 90% of the people who would still buy it, with the remaining 10% "If it doesn't affect me personally I don't care" people still buying it anyway.

It was a trainwreck that somehow managed to rip open Microsoft's chest cavity whilst simultaneously handing Sony a dagger pointing at their heart.

at the current point Microsoft's in I think they've only got one way of being successful and that would be to control every bit of media they can to only show xbox one advertisements and to get more ads for games finishing with the "now on xbox" tagline. Sony on the other hand has a really good opportunity now to bombard the media with ads about the ps4, with even more digs at the xbone's shortcomings to make the public aware that, as of right now, there is no reason to buy an xbox one as a gaming console, and as that starts to sink into the public's mindset you'll see the flock of xbox loyals start switching to not be the outcasts this gen.

The Ps+ is priced enough for me to still easily get it, it's half the price of xbox live and it comes with way more extras. To be honest I was really happy that was the only bit of bad news about the whole conference.

 

[Alex]

Peopel seem to miss that Sony announced you need to have PS+ to play online. Though Kingdom Hearts III will make me get a PS4.

Isn't that a better overall package than the regular PSN package. I'm not sure because I don't have it, but doesn't it mean you don't get some of the bugs that regular PSN has. Doesn't bother me that much I generally stay offline anyway

 

[Lee]

PSN is free, PSN+ isn't so it's essentially stating you have to pay to go online. The PSN+ package is really good with tons of freebies so if they keep it up it's not that bad a thing.

 

[LoudClearVoice]

PS4's launch price is $399 which is $100 cheaper than Xbox One. Some analysts are saying that Sony may be losing money on each console but the point is to sell as many possible because the games are what they make the money off of.

I thought it was interesting that Sony specifically addressed what many gamers are calling "cons" for the Xbox One. So, it's clear, Sony heard the fans and they are basing their marketing off of that, which is nice.

 

[M]

PS4's launch price is $399 which is $100 cheaper than Xbox One. Some analysts are saying that Sony may be losing money on each console but the point is to sell as many possible because the games are what they make the money off of.

that's probably also the reason ps+ is now mandatory to play online multiplayer, which will work out extremely well in the long term if they can get the strong launch base because most of them will be playing online and providing a strong source of income. Hopefully they keep doing the crazy awesome bundles and price cuts.

 

[Lee]

Sony confirms PS4 pre-owned DRM is 'up to third parties'.
http://www.computerandvideogames.com/412976/sony-confirms-ps4-pre-owned-drm-is-up-to-third-parties/