I am hoping to get my hands on a PS4 in 12 months (no earlier).
As for Xbox One... can that be considered a console? Besides, most of it's features (MOVIES MOVIES MOVIES, CALL OF DUTY DOGS) won't even be available for any other country but US and Canada in all likelihood!
I still go to consoles when I want some local multiplayer game I can play with my wife. But local multiplayer is slowly dying as, of course, a company would rather sell two copies of a game instead of one that can be played by two persons.
I think Lego games will be my only salvation for local multiplayer in a near future.
I play a lot of games that aren't available on PC. I buy racing games for console because my steering wheel setup is connected to my PS3, and it's annoying to switch it between my PS3 and PC. It basically involves me moving and hooking up my computer to my TV and steering wheel.
The dog in the mocap suit was pretty awesome. I don't want to pay for online features and none of the games they showed are really in my area of interest, except maybe Quantum Break when we get to see what it's actually about.
Meh. Is it just me or is gaming becoming more and more bland nowadays? It seems gaming is no longer about gaming, but rather about flashy devices with lots of useless programs and features nobody will use anyway. Just like their nifty Windows 8 software, which looks nice and sparkly, but is completely useless and empty. Every company's doing the same. I slowly feel like drowning into the grey mass of people around me. Gaming is no longer 'individualistic', it's become a shooter-action hybrid with some unimaginative fantasy topping. Every mainstream game feels the same: flashy graphics, dumbed down button-smash gameplay and uninspiring background story. I really am starting to feel gaming has lost its soul. I mean, be honest, could you really call the Xbox One a GAMING console? Also, Xbox One? Could they really not come up with a more creative name? What's next? Oh wait, it's probably the Xbox Two! Hahaha, how could I be so dumb.
It seems like they're trying to take the classic idea of a "gaming console" and turn it into a more general "living room entertainment device". That's why you're seeing things like Skype, TV, and apps here more than games.
E3 is where we'll see a lot more games for the One, so I'd expect more of a gaming focus there. Today's announcement was more about the device and its other features, since obviously everyone knows the hardware's going to be more or less the same as whatever Sony gives out.
So far I am pretty unexcited for the next gen, though I might eventually feasibly get a PS4. The lack of backwards compatibility really bugs me, however, and means I might abandon console gaming in general. I actually prefer it to PC gaming, since its what I grew up with (I was a Sega kid back in the days of the Megadrive [Genesis to you Americans], and had something like 60 games. I had a SNES as well, but that was mainly for Secret of Mana, Chrono Trigger, Final Fantasy VI, and Terranigma, which admittedly eclipse almost everything on the Megadrive. Then I got a PSX, then a PS2. Gave up gaming for a few years and finally got a PS3 about 2 years back.
I personally thought the XboxOne looked kind of appalling, but I don't really want any of them right now. At this point I will either get a 3DS or nothing at all. This might change if there are good games, though.
The XBox One is quite confusing, too. Apparently it won't be always-on, but will require an internet connection. So... mostly-on?
With the whole installation of games, it's going to basically be a mini ITX form factor desktop in your living room - and a lot less elegant than it could have been. Since that's all it's going to be, people would probably be better off going for the Steam Box.
From me, there's mostly disinterest - not disapproval or disappointment. My only hope is that the improvement in hardware brings better content - both graphically (physics technology and overall number of polygons that can be displayed) and in overall size (given the larger HDDs, games can increase the overall size - so higher poly count, higher resolution textures, larger areas, etc.) - to the PC, since most games these days are optimised for the lowest denominator (consoles).
However, given the whole "it has to be online and filled with micro-transactions or it wont make us money," outlook, I'm not holding my breath for any game that I'll play anyway. At least there'll be BG:EE and BG2:EE to look forward to.
The dog in the mocap suit was pretty awesome. I don't want to pay for online features and none of the games they showed are really in my area of interest, except maybe Quantum Break when we get to see what it's actually about.
Will there be a dog in bg2:ee? There had better be, otherwise you can hardly call it cutting edge.
"Map packs? Please. The future of Call of Duty DLC must surely be new dogs. Hopefully the first will be this Corgi, done by French artist Diana Da Costa, that is so cuddly I am about to die." -Kotaku
Regardless of all the "CAWL OV DOODY" nonsense the detractors seem to be so fond of spouting (use your heads, there's obviously more to it than that and TV, they're not going to show all their cards, even at the reveal), I am still optimistic about the Xbox One. I wish they'd called it the 720, though. Would've made my day.:D
That said, I am not mad on internet connections in consoles. We got along just fine without them for years, and the only reason you might need one is for multiplayer... and even then, people used to play those without internet. In fact, it was a more social experience because you could actually see your friends.
Well... If I had to get either of them, I would go with the PS4...
Also, the reveal of the Xbox One... It was quite underwhelming... They took an hour to say that it's the next xbox, it plays games and movies, you can watch TV through it and that Microsoft is making a Halo TV show with Speilberg.
They showed nothing there...
Also, going by specs found on the internet...
They both fail horribly at even reaching anywhere near modern PCs.
And the Xbox One shares 8 GB of RAM over everything, including 3 OS's that all have to run constantly...
PS: Whoever clapped at the mention of the Xbox One having 5 billion transistors should go cover in a corner in shame for the rest of the year.
I doubt I'll get one, not for a few years anyway. Still have stuff to play on my PS3 and there's no backwards compatibility, which means that I'll have a PS4 next to my PS3 which is next to my PS2. Two was already more than enough.
Plus, my PC does very adequately. Don't need another device.
I have xbox360 controller and I want xboxone controller too. Button color is too dull compared to 360 however it look cool enough. When will I able to play baldurs gate with controller and pc?
@Kaltzor: You are aware that consoles don't *need* to approach PCs, because they're dedicated to games, so don't need all the other stuff that PCs do. The proof is not in how like PCs they are, but in how well they do their job. Which, as I just said, is *not* to be a PC.
I don't think that is particularly trolly, but I'll tone it down.
Still the xboxone didn't offer any real incentives, and a whole lot of potential deal breakers. I bought an xbox360 over the PS3 this gen because it had a lot more going for it (granted this was after the RRoD issue). And if I buy a console for this gen the PS4 looks like a lot less of a headache.
@Kaltzor: You are aware that consoles don't *need* to approach PCs, because they're dedicated to games, so don't need all the other stuff that PCs do. The proof is not in how like PCs they are, but in how well they do their job. Which, as I just said, is *not* to be a PC.
Maybe, but the thing is that PCs can do everything these consoles can and even more, so there wouldn't really be any reason for the developers to really support either of the Xbox One or the PS4 as they could do more if they did their games on the PC as they will have better hardware to work with. And the Xbox One isn't really dedicated to games anyways... It's more of a media center device that can play games.
The you don't need to be always online to play but you need to be online was also confusing and a bad decision. Also having to pay the whole game price to activate it in a different account is a completely wrong idea.
Although I prefere XBox's way of doing things, such as you download a game from Live, it's ready to play, no need to wait for a install as the PS does, the XBox One convinced me that IF I buy one of the next gen consoles, it'll be a PS4 not an Xbox One.
Comments
As for Xbox One... can that be considered a console?
Besides, most of it's features (MOVIES MOVIES MOVIES, CALL OF DUTY DOGS) won't even be available for any other country but US and Canada in all likelihood!
I think Lego games will be my only salvation for local multiplayer in a near future.
http://money.cnn.com/quote/quote.html?symb=SNE
E3 is where we'll see a lot more games for the One, so I'd expect more of a gaming focus there. Today's announcement was more about the device and its other features, since obviously everyone knows the hardware's going to be more or less the same as whatever Sony gives out.
I personally thought the XboxOne looked kind of appalling, but I don't really want any of them right now. At this point I will either get a 3DS or nothing at all. This might change if there are good games, though.
With the whole installation of games, it's going to basically be a mini ITX form factor desktop in your living room - and a lot less elegant than it could have been. Since that's all it's going to be, people would probably be better off going for the Steam Box.
From me, there's mostly disinterest - not disapproval or disappointment. My only hope is that the improvement in hardware brings better content - both graphically (physics technology and overall number of polygons that can be displayed) and in overall size (given the larger HDDs, games can increase the overall size - so higher poly count, higher resolution textures, larger areas, etc.) - to the PC, since most games these days are optimised for the lowest denominator (consoles).
However, given the whole "it has to be online and filled with micro-transactions or it wont make us money," outlook, I'm not holding my breath for any game that I'll play anyway. At least there'll be BG:EE and BG2:EE to look forward to.
There had better be, otherwise you can hardly call it cutting edge.
(Eh, I dunno, I think I'd rather have a cat DLC.)
Also, the reveal of the Xbox One... It was quite underwhelming... They took an hour to say that it's the next xbox, it plays games and movies, you can watch TV through it and that Microsoft is making a Halo TV show with Speilberg.
They showed nothing there...
Also, going by specs found on the internet...
They both fail horribly at even reaching anywhere near modern PCs.
And the Xbox One shares 8 GB of RAM over everything, including 3 OS's that all have to run constantly...
PS: Whoever clapped at the mention of the Xbox One having 5 billion transistors should go cover in a corner in shame for the rest of the year.
Still have stuff to play on my PS3 and there's no backwards compatibility, which means that I'll have a PS4 next to my PS3 which is next to my PS2. Two was already more than enough.
Plus, my PC does very adequately. Don't need another device.
Button color is too dull compared to 360 however it look cool enough.
When will I able to play baldurs gate with controller and pc?
Still the xboxone didn't offer any real incentives, and a whole lot of potential deal breakers. I bought an xbox360 over the PS3 this gen because it had a lot more going for it (granted this was after the RRoD issue). And if I buy a console for this gen the PS4 looks like a lot less of a headache.
Although I prefere XBox's way of doing things, such as you download a game from Live, it's ready to play, no need to wait for a install as the PS does, the XBox One convinced me that IF I buy one of the next gen consoles, it'll be a PS4 not an Xbox One.