I'm excited for the xbox one

[eds1275]

In the beginning, I was all like "Screw it, when my 360 dies I'll turn to my arcade machine forever." Microsoft was going to do all that stupid crap with no used games and online always, stupid kinect and etc etc. Although the online thing didn't bother me. But the used games thing did - if I buy an old game used for $12 that I've never played it's still new to me. It's pretty much how I operate.

Anyways, once they sort of changed all the real issues I had with it I started reading up on it and then got all excited. I haven't been this excited for a console release since the Atari Jaguar or 3d0.

Though I don't think you can go wrong with either console (PS4 or Xbox) I prefer the controller of the xbox and that is what decided it for me (also the skype integration - I use it a lot). Still not sold on the Kinect but who knows, it may be good fun when the niece/nephews come out. The games I'm looking forward to the most are The Division, Thief and Watchdogs. I'll probably play Killer Instinct a bunch. I know that people are all bent out of shape because Rare wasn't involved in making it, but if you think about it IT CAME OUT 20 YEARS AGO and the chances that anyone who worked on it still has a job in that industry are slim. I mean Killer Instinct 2 wasn't even half as good as the first so they were already on the way down; perhaps it will be different but good. You can't really judge feel based on videos so I will wait to see how it feels before I judge it.

[Slippyblade]

I have zero brand loyalty.  I've been a gamer my whole life.  I managed game stores for nearly a decade.  I've come to a couple of conclusions already about this upcoming generation.

This gen, the part of the clueless, bloated, and antagonistic company will be played by Microsoft.  They will be replacing Sony of the previous generation in the same role.

Everything I see coming down the pipe from Sony in regards to the PS4 is reminding me of how they ran the PS2 generation and the PS2 rocked.  Everything I see about the Xbox1 is reminding me of the PS3.  Yeah, I don't think I need to say much more in that regard.  It's possible that Microsoft may salvage themselves, but it wont be at launch. 

I loved my PS2 over the original Xbox.
I adored my 360 over the PS3.
Pretty sure I'll be giddy with my PS4 instead of an Xbox1.

[pbj]

I'm about to cancel the PS4 pre-order and just wait this one out awhile.  All the games I'm interested in are coming out on all platforms, so there's no real incentive for me.  I can't recall any other generation jump where everything came out on both except for some brief overlap on SMS/Genesis and maybe sports games on newer systems.

[jackiabu]

I wonder how long it will take them to hack the console, or maybe even RGH

[TKW4rr10r]

I have zero brand loyalty.  I've been a gamer my whole life.  I managed game stores for nearly a decade.  I've come to a couple of conclusions already about this upcoming generation.

This gen, the part of the clueless, bloated, and antagonistic company will be played by Microsoft.  They will be replacing Sony of the previous generation in the same role.

Everything I see coming down the pipe from Sony in regards to the PS4 is reminding me of how they ran the PS2 generation and the PS2 rocked.  Everything I see about the Xbox1 is reminding me of the PS3.  Yeah, I don't think I need to say much more in that regard.  It's possible that Microsoft may salvage themselves, but it wont be at launch. 

I loved my PS2 over the original Xbox.
I adored my 360 over the PS3.
Pretty sure I'll be giddy with my PS4 instead of an Xbox1.

A thousand times this  ^^^

I usually went out of my way to get consoles at launch and have become a bit wiser in the last couple generations. So far I have no reason to burn through around $500 for either, above burning that money on my new hobby this year  . And learning from previous history I agree Sony and MS will be trading roles this Gen. Every one of the major players got content and had their hat handed to them at some point, and this Gen so far it looks to be MS' turn. It's the circle of life, at least MS is quicker to react to this then others in the past. But if I -had- to get one this holiday it would have to be the PS4.

I also think it's becoming more difficult to isolate PC gaming from consoles. Everything that used to separate them, ease of buying new or CHEAP older games, integration into the living room, cross platform sharing, ease of setup, and namely price, are all becoming invalid points. There are fewer and fewer people with a console but without a PC of some sort these days, so it makes sense to consolidate instead of managing so many different systems. I kick myself for not getting Steam sooner and have been loving the library I have amassed over the past year.

I just don't see there being 3 separate companies competing in console hardware like we see today in the market 10 years from now. But I'm rambling again....

[ark_ader]

I'm not getting either console until 2015.

What I am excited about is the PC is going to be the dominant platform where the console ports will be based from due to the CISC architecture.

So you will have development houses working flat out on graphical content on stock PC and then having them tailor the graphics to their respective system capability.

The PC will come back as THE ultimate gaming platform.

Remember you heard it here first.

[eds1275]

I suppose for the hardcore gamer there is always a "winner" when it comes to consoles. People love to fight about everything from processor speed to ram, way back to number of bits. If you get a bad game on a great system, specs mean nothing. Rainbow Six Vegas is a good example of this, the PS3 version is awful compared to the 360 version (not saying it's a good game, I had high hopes it would be like you know... a rainbow six game) I recall the PS3 had an outrageous price tag when it came out, and a limited selection of good games. But after a while, in my opinion, the playing field was even enough - could you really go wrong one way or another?

I have a feeling it will be the same this time around. I will get it the xbox on the 21st and report back my findings.

[TKW4rr10r]

I will get it the xbox on the 21st and report back my findings.

Please do! We can live vicariously through your purchase 

[Franco B]

I'm not overly bothered about the 'next gen' of consoles but I'll more than likely pick one them both up at some point.

I'm far more looking forward to the HD consumer version of the Oculus Rift 

[knave]

The hardware geek in me is excited for both of the new consoles...but the time and cash strapped realist in me says I'm not that interested yet.

I went from having no modern consoles to having all three of the big names and truth is...I was really happy with the wii both when I got it and now,  Kinda ok with the xbox 360 and pretty disappointed the PS3.

It's not the quality of the console the ps3 is a fine piece of tech but I don't want to play on it. it's not fun for me. I really think it's the controller...not PS3 vs Xbox...but all controllers. I want to play RPGs and FPS games with a mouse and keyboard. I do like to use a controller for platform games and driving games though...but really only if the mood strikes me and burnout 3 still tops my list on the original xbox.

If I don't play the PS3 or Xbox 360 (apart from lego indy with the kids) Why would it benefit me to get a new console. It would only gather dust. Plus I have a stack of XBOX 360 games I haven't played yet...

...I am happy with the OUYA for some reason...perhaps because I use it for more than just games...and since I have it on all the time it's real easy to try out a new game.

 

[ark_ader]

If I don't play the PS3 or Xbox 360 (apart from lego indy with the kids) Why would it benefit me to get a new console. It would only gather dust. Plus I have a stack of XBOX 360 games I haven't played yet...

If you plug in the Xbox 360 into the HDMI in on the Xbox One, you would have backward compatibility of sorts.

[eds1275]

If you plug in the Xbox 360 into the HDMI in on the Xbox One, you would have backward compatibility of sorts.

...that is, unless your 360 red ringed and the replacement refurbished one they sent you didn't have an hdmi port. Hopefully that kind of nonsense is behind them. But who am I kidding?

[knave]

If you plug in the Xbox 360 into the HDMI in on the Xbox One, you would have backward compatibility of sorts.

Not that that's not cool and all, but why wouldn'y I just um...play the 360?

[Slippyblade]

If you plug in the Xbox 360 into the HDMI in on the Xbox One, you would have backward compatibility of sorts.

I don't want to sound rude, but that is the dumbest thing I've ever heard.  When I first heard the Microsoft guy say it, I snorted my soda.  Why would I ever do that?  It's not Back Compatible if you still need the original equipment.  Why would I plug in my Xbox into an Xbox1?  Um, I'll just plug my Xbox into my TV.  BOOM!  done.

This quote would be like saying, "If you plug your Nintendo into your VCR, it allows you to play Nintendo on your VCR!"

No.  It doesn't.

[knave]

This quote would be like saying, "If you plug your Nintendo into your VCR, it allows you to play Nintendo on your VCR!"

No.  It doesn't.

But it did allow you to easily record your gameplay on a VHS tape...LOL

[ChadTower]

I don't care who "wins".  I'm not on a team.  I'm a consumer.  I don't care what the name on the console is.  I expect entertainment value for my dollar and I expect good software.  To me the hardware isn't nearly as important as the software.  Pretty games that are no fun present no value to me.

That's probably why I just got both a PS3 and a 360 for the first time over the last two months.  And it's why I still don't have a Wii U.  The value wasn't there for me on the PS3/360 until now and the software hasn't been there on the Wii U.

Maybe my kids are atypical.  My older son gets excited for Vectrex homebrew releases and my younger son is constantly challenging his uninitiated friends on Tecmo Bowl and destroying them with Bo Jackson.   

[eds1275]

I don't care who "wins".  I'm not on a team.  I'm a consumer.  I don't care what the name on the console is.  I expect entertainment value for my dollar

You have summed up everything I think of when I play console games and people are hassling me about minute differences in spec between consoles. The big debate is that whole Call of Duty Ghosts rumour of running at 720 on xbox and 1080 on PS. It's still not been confirmed, and people are talking as if it's fact. They don't take into account that if it is true it may look better on the xbox if it is devoting more power to shading, textures etc rather than the higher resolution (personally I don't really notice or care - I mean I play 30 year old arcade games more than my xbox 360.)

That being said, hit me up on Xbox Live if you're on there - Lt Nicholls is my gamertag. Just tell me you're from this forum otherwise I will likely ignore it. And yes, adding the Lt on the front of my gamertag was stupid. Now when I play my games and level up... I'm Sargent Lieutenant. D'oh.

[ChadTower]

Ha.  I haven't been on Live yet.  Don't know if I want to bother paying for the subscription.  It does look like it might be worth it at the annual rate, though, as most of the games I have bought have a lot of content disabled without Live.

[pbj]

Years ago, I put a stupid post on xbox-scene about "playing Gamecube on your Xbox."  To prove it worked, I provided a picture of my Gamecube that had been taped to the top of my Xbox.

Get it?

Microsoft's solution for 360 games sounds like someone read that post and took it seriously.

 

[eds1275]

This whole backwards compatibility thing is just ridiculous. The consumers feel entitled to it for some reason, but I compare it to cramming a NES cartridge into a SNES - even if it were able to fit, why do people think it works? It's easier to visualize if you put a disc into a disc drive and it doesn't work - a 360 disc looks the same as a ps3 disc in terms of size and shape. But backwards compatibility is more than having it fit. Since everyone (as in ms/sony) on a new graphics system you can't just get it to run without a buttload of work, and it will take more processing power - a lot more -  to do so than just running a 360 or ps3. Mame is a good example of why.

[pbj]

Backwards compatibility makes it a little easier to convince mom that you won't need a thousand dollars of brand new games to keep the little ---daisies--- occupied for awhile.  As the average age and affluence of gamers climbs, it's certainly less of an issue, but all those people that bought the same games over and over in the early 80s are still bitter about it.

[knave]

I used to be a huge proponent of backwards compatibility...
...since I have been convinced that it is not necessary.

Main reason is that folks who have a large library of older titles usually have the old hardware to play it on too. All that extra work/cost doesn't seem justified anymore.

I liked it back in the day when I didn't buy all the consoles...I enjoyed buying games cheap from the older version that were new to me, until I found the games I wanted for the newer system.
I have bought almost as many gamecube games as wii games to play on the wii.

[eds1275]

I've just started liquidating my xbox 360 titles on my local craigslist, because frankly my ancient xbox is so loud I need to crank up the TV to hear over it.

[ark_ader]

I've just started liquidating my xbox 360 titles on my local craigslist, because frankly my ancient xbox is so loud I need to crank up the TV to hear over it.

I looked at doing that, but I have well over 200 UK titles for the Xbox 360 and I know I will never get my money back on what I paid.  That is nearly $4K worth of games.

[eds1275]

I thought about it from that angle, but the majority of my games were purchased used or past their prime for $5-20. I buy, play, and complete one game at a time, occasionally coming back to it again for a replay. I am over them, not a collector, and want to clear out the real estate 60+ games take up on the shelf. I've kept a few that are great for groups or the ones I like to play with my wife. But the majority of them were just sitting there... I hope some dad snatches them all up (they're going for $5 apiece) and gives his kids one hell of a christmas.

[Slippyblade]

I'm a huge fan of Back Compatibility.  Sony made me scream when they literally REMOVED the ability from the PS3.  That's one of the reasons I really didn't like the PS3, the removed features from the system as it aged.  What the hell???

I truly don't understand why more companies don't do it.  It's a great selling point because it means your console has hundreds of games AT LAUNCH.  Considering that BC these days is software emulation and as the parent company you have every bit of spec on the machines, just do it!

[eds1275]

I don't think it's quite that simple. And I believe since they are using a different graphics processor it becomes hardware emulation as well. From a business standpoint, it makes sense  why waste the money in it when the people who want it most likely already have a 360? And if nobody else is doing it, then they can't really be any worse than the other companies. Now I'm not saying I agree with it or like the fact, but I do understand it. They might lose some sales over it, at least for the short term. Playstation has suggested that they may re-release games over the mystical cloud or through an "emulated environment," however it sounds to me like either way they will just try to make you pay for your games again. Microsoft seems to be suggesting the same thing.

[DaveMMR]

I truly don't understand why more companies don't do it. 

Money.  PS3 had to remove PS2 emulation to lower costs. The Wii Family and Mini editions removed Gamecube compatibility to sell them cheaper. Atari 5200 and Genesis (or Mega-Drive) only accomplished BC through additional peripherals.

Also, focusing too much on backwards compatibility does come at the expense of advanced features unique to the new consoles. The Atari 7800, able to play almost the entire 2600 library, had to sacrifice advanced sound chips to fit the VCS hardware. The original model of Wii is great at playing Gamecube but only because the console is almost graphically similar to its predecessor. They even added GC controller and memory card ports - its inclusion is space and money not being used on extra bells and whistles.

Personally, I never was able to accept the limitations of BC on Sony and Microsoft's boxes. It's easier to keep the old consoles around (and they're really easy to find in thrift stores, garages sales, etc.) than deal with the rare but annoying incompatibilities or emulation glitch.

[Howard_Casto]

Also common sense.  Just take the xbox vs 360 for example.  The first xbox had an nvidia processor and the 360 had an ati one.  Believe it or not they had to pay a license to NVidia to get a emulator made to run the xbox games on the 360.  That is ridiculous.

I honestly think backwards compatibility is a product of the spoiled, younger generation.  The Snes didn't play NES games and nobody expected it to.  The Genesis wouldn't play Master System games....  if you want to play old games keep your old consoles.... it's as simple as that.

[DaveMMR]

I honestly think backwards compatibility is a product of the spoiled, younger generation.  The Snes didn't play NES games and nobody expected it to.  The Genesis wouldn't play Master System games....  if you want to play old games keep your old consoles.... it's as simple as that.

The Genesis had the Power Base Converter.

I do remember reading previews for the upcoming, at the time, SNES and many commentators were criticizing Nintendo's new console for not playing the original NES carts (unlike the aforementioned Genesis and 7800.) Backwards compatibility is nothing new.