PS4: Sony Will Let Microsoft Make First Move

[JulietStMoon]

There you have it... when a GBA temp thread of this nature ISN'T filled with butthurt rage and stupid arguments, it's filled with "prophets of doom" heralding the inevitable occurrence of it.

 

[Foxi4]

There you have it... when a GBA temp thread of this nature ISN'T filled with butthurt rage and stupid arguments, it's filled with "prophets of doom" heralding the inevitable occurrence of it.

We're on Page 3 now, the prophecy may very well still be fulfilled once The One enters the stage and all of the Nintendo Fandom jumps him as per usual. We all know who I'm talking about.

Spoiler

 

[Hyro-Sama]

The day is still young. There is plenty of time for this thread to turn ugly.

 

[LAA]

Saying that doesnt fill me with confidence... They probably want to copy the Xbox, ha ha, why cant they have enough confidence/trust in their ideas/console? Although, admittedly, it must be much harder for Sony/Microsoft, they're pretty much directly competing against each other, compared to nintendo, who somehow compete, but at the same time, don't, its funnily odd...
I had a Wii last gen, got bored of it like a year or two later, moved on to 360, had my best online experience on it (Which so far, nothing has beat Halo 3 custom games/MM), and just last year, I decided to get a PS3, as I started to notice nothing was coming to 360 I cared about anymore and PS3 was getting a lot, as well as lots of HD collections which made my childhood awesome really. Still a lot I want for it this year + Vita for that matter.
I got a Wii U about 3 weeks ago and I really love it at the moment, I laugh when I look at it, then look at 360/PS3, two massive bricks, and the Wii U is just a longer Wii really. Thankfully, the signal from the console can be recieved on the gamepad downstairs, (Although weirdly, when it was set up downstairs at first, the signal didnt reach upstairs...?), so I'm very happy with it at the moment and I very much look forward to what nintendo can do with it, as well as 3rd parties. I just hope it can get some multi-platform with PS4/720, I would like to know how much more powerful Wii U is compared to PS3/360, so I can get a better idea of what it can do, but if Wii U can handle UE4, it should be getting PS4/720 multiplatform titles surely.
I'm not really convinced the jump from 360/PS3 - 720/PS4 will be very significant, even the likes of the samirtan tech demo from epic, didnt seem a vastly significant jump, compared to PS2 - PS3, and I'm not even sure PS4/720 will be able to even handle those types of graphics, as I believe the technology used to make that wasnt even publicly available at that point and would be very, very expensive, which I'm sure Microsoft/Sony wont be making consoles for at those prices.

Either way, from the way things were last gen, I think so far, its looking likely PS4 is what I'll be getting, but ultimately depends on what microsoft/sony both show. If Xbox charge for live again, not getting 720 definitely, (Same if they use kinect as the main user input, I just dont get it and dont like it), I still fail to understand why they are charging for live, I remember them saying it was to pay back costs put into making xbox live, and if it was, definitely paid off by now surely, sadly I dont see that happening... Only way microsoft can attempt to win me back is if its vastly superior in terms of graphics to PS4, has some very interesting control scheme and has more meaningful exclusives, Gears is boring to me now sadly, fable is the same thing, viva pinata... need I say more? Only thing they have is halo, which... is a great game to be fair, but Halo 4, as much as the campaign was brilliant, multiplayer to me had less to offer than previous games, spartan ops is the only really great addition, so I cant see Halo 5 being so great that it'll make me want a 720. PS4 just seems on the right lines so far, judging by PS3 anyway, with lots of unique exclusives and etc., but we'll see... With these, I'll likely be waiting a few months before deciding, maybe longer, I'm still perfectly happy with PS3 and future titles its promising.

 

[slingblade1170]

I will be buying a Wii U soon and i will save for the Xbox 720. I respect Sony but I no longer buy their products and to let MS make the first move is probably a stupid move in my opinion.

 

[AngryGeek416]

I shake my head in confusion for anyone that buys Microsoft products, more specifically their game consoles. Shitty Exlucsives, you pay for online, no originality. Sony & Nintendo all the way, I just now bought a 360 and i got Dead Rising,Mass Effect, Tales of Vesperia and thats it. Microsoft is responsible for the wave of shitty gaming nowadays with all these FPS crazed americans, i wanna move to Japan where NO ONE has a 360 and live a happy life.

 

[JulietStMoon]

Why does everyone assume Sony is waiting just to copy Microsoft? It's almost certain they've been working on whatever it is for who knows how long now... probably far along enough that they're not going to be able to copy major features of the Nextbox even if they wanted to.

 

[Foxi4]

Why does everyone assume Sony is waiting just to copy Microsoft? It's almost certain they've been working on whatever it is for who knows how long now... probably far along enough that they're not going to be able to copy major features of the Nextbox even if they wanted to.

Yup. I mean, they worked on the PSMove back in PS2 days, it's fair to assume that whatever the PS4 will come equipped with was designed and tested throughout the PS3's life cycle, it was just kept under wraps until the time comes.

Sony just happens to release their accessories soon after their competition comes up with something that's near-identical.

 

[Dork]

Just a quick question, why do people continuously compare the PS4 and 720 but leave the Wii U out, I keep seeing 360/PS3 or 720/PS4.

That worries me, do people not see Nintendo as a competitor anymore?

 

[AngryGeek416]

Just a quick question, why do people continuously compare the PS4 and 720 but leave the Wii U out, I keep seeing 360/PS3 or 720/PS4.

That worries me, do people not see Nintendo as a competitor anymore?

Apparently after one weak system, there out of the running.

 

[Foxi4]

Apparently after one weak system, there out of the running.

Nintendo had a long streak of "weak systems", starting from the Nintendo 64 which was superior in hardware and inferior in design (in every conceivable way), the Gamecube which was a console with entirely appropriate specs but with features from a generation earlier which simply didn't cut it in the Multimedia age (meaning it had zero Multimedia support when DVD was all the rage) and the Wii which admittedly sold the best last generation, but no matter how you cut it, apart from a few (very notable!) exceptions was a Casual Funhouse and couldn't possibly appeal to the "core gamer" due to its highly-inferior specs compared to the competition which resulted in very little cross-platform games (on the other hand, it did spawn a lot of exclusive titles, so there you have it - two sides of the coin).

Now, don't get me wrong - the WiiU is alright for this generation, I'm just correcting.

 

[AngryGeek416]

Nintendo had a long streak of "weak systems", starting from the Nintendo 64 which was superior in hardware and inferior in design (in every conceivable way), the Gamecube which was a console with entirely appropriate specs but with features from a generation earlier which simply didn't cut it in the Multimedia age (meaning it had zero Multimedia support when DVD was all the rage) and the Wii which admittedly sold the best last generation, but no matter how you cut it, apart from a few (very notable!) exceptions was a Casual Funhouse and couldn't possibly appeal to the "core gamer" due to its highly-inferior specs compared to the competition which resulted in very little cross-platform games (on the other hand, it did spawn a lot of exclusive titles, so there you have it - two sides of the coin).

Now, don't get me wrong - the WiiU is alright for this generation, I'm just correcting.

I never said Nintendo hasn't made mistakes of course they have, but the Wii is their first system to be extremely under powered graphicaly during its generation. The Gamecube was a powerhouse in such a small size its completely underrated.

 

[Foxi4]

I never said Nintendo hasn't made mistakes of course they have, but the Wii is their first system to be extremely under powered graphicaly during its generation. The Gamecube was a powerhouse in such a small size its completely underrated.

Well, yeah - I can agree with that. The Wii was their first home console that was pretty "piss poor" hardware-wise when compared to its competitors, yes. That said, history shows that hardware horsepower doesn't always equate to "victory" on the market - there are other components, such as design, ease of development, features, price point and "gimmicks", which is why the DS and the Wii were victorious last generation, by a landslide.

To me, a true "winner" has to create a balance between all those factors and offer the hardware at a price point achievable to the average Joe - if a company can provide hardware that will be cheap to buy and will last for the next 5-7 years, it's fair to treat it as a competitor. You don't have to have "the best" hardware, you gotta have "hardware appropriate to the generation you're in". The "Cold War" in console gaming pretty much ended.

...but I digress.

 

[JulietStMoon]

Nintendo had a long streak of "weak systems", starting from the Nintendo 64 which was superior in hardware and inferior in design (in every conceivable way), the Gamecube which was a console with entirely appropriate specs but with features from a generation earlier which simply didn't cut it in the Multimedia age (meaning it had zero Multimedia support when DVD was all the rage) and the Wii which admittedly sold the best last generation, but no matter how you cut it, apart from a few (very notable!) exceptions was a Casual Funhouse and couldn't possibly appeal to the "core gamer" due to its highly-inferior specs compared to the competition which resulted in very little cross-platform games (on the other hand, it did spawn a lot of exclusive titles, so there you have it - two sides of the coin).

Now, don't get me wrong - the WiiU is alright for this generation, I'm just correcting.

I would like to think I fit the definition of a "core gamer," and I do the vast majority of my console gaming on my Wii. Even though I got my Xbox 360 in February of last year (2 months before I got a Wii), I've only seriously played through three games, and am working on my fourth.

I'm not saying that the Wii wasn't underpowered as hell, because it definitely was. I'm just saying that to suggest there's no way it could appeal to the core gamer without the right specs is absurd. I understand what you're saying about the cross-platform titles, but Nintendo has such a freaking huge library of first and second party IPs that, depending on the gamer, there could definitely be more than enough games to satisfy a core gamer. If I had to choose between Zelda, Metroid, Kirby, Super Mario Galaxy, etc on the Wii and Gears of War, Halo (the only two Xbox exclusive I really care about, lol), and the entire library of cross-platform titles on the 360, I would always choose the Wii.

Just my personal take on it. If it were, say, the 360 that were in the Wii's position, uderpowered and without many cross-platform titles, then I would be more inclined to agree since Microsoft's line of great exclusives is almost nonexistent. But Nintendo has such a huge library of exclusive IPs that it's enough to sell most Nintendo fans on that, alone.

 

[Foxi4]

I would like to think I fit the definition of a "core gamer," and I do the vast majority of my console gaming on my Wii. Even though I got my Xbox 360 in February of last year (2 months before I got a Wii), I've only seriously played through three games, and am working on my fourth.

I'm not saying that the Wii wasn't underpowered as hell, because it definitely was. I'm just saying that to suggest there's no way it could appeal to the core gamer without the right specs is absurd. I understand what you're saying about the cross-platform titles, but Nintendo has such a freaking huge library of first and second party IPs that, depending on the gamer, there could definitely be more than enough games to satisfy a core gamer. If I had to choose between Zelda, Metroid, Kirby, Super Mario Galaxy, etc on the Wii and Gears of War, Halo (the only two Xbox exclusive I really care about, lol), and the entire library of cross-platform titles on the 360, I would always choose the Wii.

Just my personal take on it. If it were, say, the 360 that were in the Wii's position, uderpowered and without many cross-platform titles, then I would be more inclined to agree since Microsoft's line of great exclusives is almost nonexistent. But Nintendo has such a huge library of exclusive IPs that it's enough to sell most Nintendo fans on that, alone.

It really depends on your definition of a "core gamer", which isn't even set in stone to begin with. Believe it or not, I don't even have a 360/PS3 (yet), most of my gaming throughout the last generation was on no other console but the Wii.

My definition of "core" games is pretty clear though - did the Wii have Skyrim? Deus Ex: HR? Fallout 3/New Vegas? Portal 1/2? Crisis? Batman: Arkham Assylum/City? The Witcher? The list goes on forever, and do note, I'm not mentioning exclusives here at all, just not to be accused of "Rarara, you don't like it because it's not a Sony/Microsoft console!".

Games that were "considered" core weren't on the system specifically because of its hardware limitations, I can't help but feel like the largest portion of Wii games that are "worth a damn" are first or second-party, and hardly "core" at that.

Now, this isn't a bad thing - to the contrary, for a "Nintendo Gamer", the Wii was a godsend - it really catered to the needs of its target audience which is why it sold well. It wasn't the console for an Average Joe the Gamer though.

 

[chyyran]

It really depends on your definition of a "core gamer", which isn't even set in stone to begin with. Believe it or not, I don't even have a 360/PS3 (yet), most of my gaming throughout the last generation was on no other console but the Wii.

My definition of "core" games is pretty clear though - did the Wii have Skyrim? Deus Ex: HR? Fallout 3/New Vegas? Portal 1/2? Crisis? Batman: Arkham Assylum/City? The Witcher? The list goes on forever, and do note, I'm not mentioning exclusives here at all, just not to be accused of "Rarara, you don't like it because it's not a Sony/Microsoft console!".

Games that were "considered" core weren't on the system specifically because of its hardware limitations, I can't help but feel like the largest portion of Wii games that are "worth a damn" are first or second-party, and hardly "core" at that.

Now, this isn't a bad thing - to the contrary, for a "Nintendo Gamer", the Wii was a godsend - it really catered to the needs of its target audience which is why it sold well. It wasn't the console for an Average Joe the Gamer though.

PC > All.

I get my Wii gaming from Dolphin now, but I still use my Wii to mess around, and if Dolphin doesn't work for a game

Still looking to pick up a PS3 for console only games and exclusives though.

 

[PolloDiablo]

Just a quick question, why do people continuously compare the PS4 and 720 but leave the Wii U out, I keep seeing 360/PS3 or 720/PS4.
That worries me, do people not see Nintendo as a competitor anymore?

I noticed that too (specially in GameTrailers)
I guess talking about Nintendo in a non derogative way makes you uncool

 

[Guild McCommunist]

I can concur that Xbox Live is a fucking ripoff. Hell I just found out at a friends house that to play multiplayer or use Youtube, Netflix, Amazon Video or even the goddamn internet browser (all apps free on the PS3/Wii U), you need a Gold subscription. All this time, I thought that these basic functions were free and that you paid for other extras

The only reason Microsoft continues to charge for this stuff is because people still pay for Xbox Live. And sadly, that doesn't look like it'll change any time soon.

This most definitely. I give a lot of shit to Nintendo for their online systems but at least you can do basic things for free. It almost feels like there's no point in owning a Xbox without Gold. Can't do multiplayer, can't use any apps, you can basically only use it for single player games. I mean it was "acceptable" when the PS3 cost hundreds of dollars more and the Wii wasn't on its level (not saying that negatively, it was just developed differently and wasn't made like the PS3 and Xbox were) but with the PS3 at $250 (pay a couple more bucks and you get an amazing bundle) and the Wii U at $300 (again, pay a bit more and get more) and they at least get Netflix and such for free, it's ridiculous.

Only reason I paid for Xbox Live was because all my friends had it. In retrospect I'd convince everyone to buy a PS3 instead.

 

[KingVamp]

At least Sony give you the basic things while still offering extra.

Some other Sony CEO says they didn't want to wait too long after the Wii u.
http://www.gonintendo.com/?mode=viewstory&id=167231

So I wonder how long they will wait for Microsoft to make the move.

 

[JulietStMoon]

This most definitely. I give a lot of shit to Nintendo for their online systems but at least you can do basic things for free. It almost feels like there's no point in owning a Xbox without Gold. Can't do multiplayer, can't use any apps, you can basically only use it for single player games. I mean it was "acceptable" when the PS3 cost hundreds of dollars more and the Wii wasn't on its level (not saying that negatively, it was just developed differently and wasn't made like the PS3 and Xbox were) but with the PS3 at $250 (pay a couple more bucks and you get an amazing bundle) and the Wii U at $300 (again, pay a bit more and get more) and they at least get Netflix and such for free, it's ridiculous.

Only reason I paid for Xbox Live was because all my friends had it. In retrospect I'd convince everyone to buy a PS3 instead.

Same here. Just this summer, you could never convince me to get Xbox Live. But since I moved at least 3 hours away from most of my friends in August, and into 1-room efficiency the size of a hotel room with my girlfriend (in other words, no way there's enough room to have guests over to play games locally) at that, Xbox live became basically the only way to play with my buddies. I've been toying around with free trial passes, and that 1 month of Xbox live sale that they had the end of last month for only $5.99, and now I'm definitely going to just buy a 1-year gold subscription when it runs out. Aside from online gaming with buddies, there's youtube and netflix, which is a big deal for me since I dont plan to get a Wii U until MUCH later this year (read: When I have tons of money and Nintendo announces a soon upcoming Metroid, Zelda, Kirby, or Smash Bros.).