Gaming Between Xbox One and PS4 I went and bought a Wii U

[fdias]

The hardware is completely different. If Sony wanted backwards compatibility in the PS4, they'd basically have to throw a PS3 inside the console, which would be very expensive.

They tried that with the PS3 at launch, and it was one of the factors that led to the absurdly high price point ("599 US dollars!" etc., etc.).

Did not know that. Well since Sony bought Gaikai I don't know their plans, but they could at least let you play the games you own without charging for them again. I don't know how complex this would be for Sony to manage, but it would be nice.

Anyway I also believe the future of gaming will be 100% discless and on the cloud so like it is on Apples App Store you have games and apps to that specific account and can download them at will.

 

[emigre]

I own PS3 and X360 and had just one FPS (Gears of War 2). I believe that one thing is for sure, Nintendo games are more family oriented in general. Of course you have FPS and AC3, AC4 etc, but it's undeniable that Wii U has more games for kids and the family and less violent games and FPS.

Gears is TPS Einstein.

 

[GameWinner]

I own PS3 and X360 and had just one FPS (Gears of War 2). I believe that one thing is for sure, Nintendo games are more family oriented in general. Of course you have FPS and AC3, AC4 etc, but it's undeniable that Wii U has more games for kids and the family and less violent games and FPS.

So?
Sony and Microsoft does too.

 

[fdias]

Gears is TPS Einstein.

You are right. That show how much I used to play it. Thanks for the heads up! I don't know what I would have done without your guidance

 

[fdias]

So?
Sony and Microsoft does too.

I don't see your point. Sony and Microsoft does too what?

 

[RchUncleSkeleton]

Pffffffft, alright. If these are your unique and interesting stories, I think you need to experience more stories.



Call of Duty has a stronger, more cohesive storyline than most Nintendo franchises, and the sad thing is I'm not even joking here.

So being in WWII or shooting terrorists is considered a "strong and cohesive storyline"? I raise my white flag to you sir...

 

[Gahars]

So being in WWII or shooting terrorists is considered a "strong and cohesive storyline"? I raise my white flag to you sir...

Because a story is bad if it involves war or terrorism?

 

[emigre]

Because a story is bad if it involves war or terrorism?

Spec Ops had an awesome story and it was about war and the morality behind it.

 

[RchUncleSkeleton]

Because a story is bad if it involves war or terrorism?

What story? The limited narrative that's been lifted from the multitude of films that did it before? If that's what you mean, then yes it's brilliant story telling!

Spec Ops had an awesome story and it was about war and the morality behind it.

I admit Spec Ops was good, but it was also a fairly new concept in video games when it came out.

 

[Gahars]

What story? The limited narrative that's been lifted from the multitude of films that did it before? If that's what you mean, then yes it's brilliant story telling!

Criticizing games for telling stories about war because there are movies about war is like criticizing movies about war because The Iliad beat them to it.

 

[GameWinner]

I don't see your point. Sony and Microsoft does too what?

They both have games for families.

 

[RchUncleSkeleton]

Criticizing games for telling stories about war because there are movies about war is like criticizing movies about war because The Iliad beat them to it.

I'm simply criticizing the very limited narrative which wasn't even original to begin with.

 

[Gahars]

I'm simply criticizing the very limited narrative which wasn't even original to begin with.

"The subject has to be entirely original or it isn't good." Shit, someone tell Shakespeare that. That hack, basing his plays on age old tales and themes, pffft. What a fraud. I mean, The Bard? More like The Barf.

...Or, you know, maybe you're just talking out of your ass without the faintest clue about what you're talking about.

I mean, it's just funny that you're saying all this without a hint of irony while at the same time holding The Legend of Zelda (fantasy so generic it'd make Tolkien blush) as a pinnacle of "unique and interesting storytelling."

 

[grossaffe]

I think people have a problem of over-simplifying the story of a game when it suites their point. "Oh wow, it's about war, real original", "oh, you save the princess, real original", etc.. A big part of what makes a story memorable isn't necessarily the story itself, but if the story-telling is good.
Take The Last Of Us, for example. If you were to simplify it down, you could say it was bland and unoriginal; just another zombie outbreak. But it's not the story itself that is what made it work, it was how well they executed the telling of the story and really getting down to the elements of humanity.

 

[Guild McCommunist]

That's very true. You gotta love Nintendo's backward compatibility. Microsoft and Sony could take a lesson from them. I also love that you can buy and play old school games from NES, SNES, N64 etc.

It's like when you own the latest Nintendo system you own them all.

Because the SNES, N64, and Gamecube were totally backwards compatible.

 

[grossaffe]

Because the SNES, N64, and Gamecube were totally backwards compatible.

Gameboy Color, Gameboy Advance, Nintendo DS, Wii, 3DS, Wii U all had backwards compatibility.

 

[Guild McCommunist]

Gameboy Color, Gameboy Advance, Nintendo DS, Wii, 3DS, Wii U all had backwards compatibility.

Still doesn't really change my point. Nintendo (nor is anyone) amazing with backwards compatibility. The only reason Sony cut it out was because it was too expensive.

 

[grossaffe]

Still doesn't really change my point. Nintendo (nor is anyone) amazing with backwards compatibility. The only reason Sony cut it out was because it was too expensive.

I'm not going to criticize the decision not to include backwards compatibility on the PS4 given their choice of architecture moving to x86_64 (can't say I approve of the choice to go to x86, though; not a fan of the architecture). Hell, even if they stuck with PPC, backwards compatibility probably wouldn't have been worth it because of the convoluted cell processor they decided to go with on the PS3, and it would be a mistake to reproduce the cell structure with the new hardware.

But Nintendo has indeed shown a long history of backwards compatibility. You wouldn't expect the N64 to have it with the huge leap into 3D that generation, and you wouldn't expect the Gamecube to have it with the adoption of optical media.

 

[fdias]

I'm simply criticizing the very limited narrative which wasn't even original to begin with.

That's what I was saying. All 3 have family games and violent 17+ M Games, but you have to admit Nintendo has more Family oriented games and PS and Xbox (Specially the new gen PS4 and XONE) have more violent games. I'm not saying it's bad, just that if you want to buy a system for the whole family of for a young kid, then you are better off with a Nintendo.

 

[fdias]

I'm not going to criticize the decision not to include backwards compatibility on the PS4 given their choice of architecture moving to x86_64 (can't say I approve of the choice to go to x86, though; not a fan of the architecture). Hell, even if they stuck with PPC, backwards compatibility probably wouldn't have been worth it because of the convoluted cell processor they decided to go with on the PS3, and it would be a mistake to reproduce the cell structure with the new hardware.

But Nintendo has indeed shown a long history of backwards compatibility. You wouldn't expect the N64 to have it with the huge leap into 3D that generation, and you wouldn't expect the Gamecube to have it with the adoption of optical media.

Exactly Of course Wii U couldn't have a slot for N64 cartridges, but of all 3 (MS, Sony and Nintendo) I believe is clear Nintendo has the advantage when it comes to backwards compatibility.