How will you choose between MS & Sony's new consoles?

As an owner of both the 360 and PS3, I snap up most exclusives for either. The 360 has The Witcher 2, which is for me, better than Skyrim. I was a big fan of the Halo and GOW series, until both dried up in the ideas and fun department. Until recently, only the 360 had Deadly Premonitions (The PS3 version has improved the game) and then there's Alan Wake, as well as stuff like Fez, Super Meat Boy, but here's the deal...

The PS3 has better exclusives, if you ask me. The Uncharted series, Killzones, Resistances, MGS4, Heavy Rain, Journey, Demon's Souls, the Little Big Planets, The Last Of Us. I play a lot of games, and I always ignore people who decide to give an opinion of which consoles have better exclusives, when they only own one console, saying things like "Well those games don't interest me"... phhft, whatever. Easy to say, if you're interests are limited.

If Sony start the PS4 campaign like they've finished the PS3 one, then they will be delivering some of the best games you can get in 2014 onwards, while Microsoft sort of got by on early DLC for multiplatform games of late. I know who my money's on, the developers, and where they seem to be flocking to.

2Mad2BeMad wrote: »

they went on about it for as long as xbox did :L

MS probably spent less time during the E3 conference and they only mentioned some social/sharing stuff as they've gotten most of that information out at the announcement.

2Mad2BeMad wrote: »

t
so at least i have my fanboy hat off :L
you sony boys cant admit when something bad is sad about the ps4 :pac:
which is pathetic

When you stop making **** up the "Sony boys" will stop calling you on it.

Retr0gamer wrote: »

Very disappointing that it seems 30FPS will be the norm again. It's kind of inevitible since the trade off in how much more detail you can put in a game if you drop the framerate is so tempting.

Depends on the game really which is more important, I'd take sub 720@60 for a fighting game certain shooters but are games where the hit to framerate is worth it.

Playing Planetside 2 right now where it's a major issue and frame rates can go from 90+ to 30+ for me, and since hit detection is client side and framerate based it's a huge pain; the game is badly optimized and even faster PCs suffer in large battles.

For Infamous and Killzone 30 is fine but I hope BF4 runs at 60.

Varik wrote: »

Playing Planetside 2 right now where it's a major issue and frame rates can go from 90+ to 30+ for me, and since hit detection is client side and framerate based it's a huge pain; the game is badly optimized and even faster PCs suffer in large battles.

I have high hopes for it being my new MAG on PS4, but this isn't good, surely.

Retr0gamer wrote: »

Very disappointing that it seems 30FPS will be the norm again. It's kind of inevitible since the trade off in how much more detail you can put in a game if you drop the framerate is so tempting.

It depends on the type of game, the Uncharteds and The Last of Us style games are fine at 30FPS. The shooters and fighting games would want to be 60FPS.

Stability and consistency are the most important things when it comes to fps. The vast majority of games perform perfectly fine at 30 fps as long as its locked there and doesn't dip.

For example, a game that runs at a constant 30 fps will look, play and feel a lot more smooth than a 60 fps that occasionally dips into the 20's. It's just so jarring and noticeable.

30 fps is fine. The only area where 60 fps matters is First person shooter multiplayer and fighting games. Racing games are hit and miss so that's a judgement call. Every other genre doesn't need it.

Varik wrote: »

For Infamous and Killzone 30 is fine but I hope BF4 runs at 60.

I'm fairly sure they did say at E3 before the Battlefield demo that it was running at 60fps. Honestly, I don't notice any real problems on my PS3 with framerate, even when switching over from a PC. 30fps usually does fine for me even though there are a lot of PC gamers who would call it "unplayable".

http://www.giantbomb.com/articles/microsoft-to-pull-complete-reversal-on-xbox-one-dr/1100-4673/

Hmmm

what is it about ?

Well after all the revelations about the Xbox One, I've gone from buying-the-XboxOne to definitely-not-buying-the-XboxOne. Might buy a PS now, still not sure. I know Microsoft's lack of consumer focus is legendary but I'm amazed they have made so many obvious errors this time around.

The extra $100 I could have personally overlooked if everything else was ok but the potential privacy issues, the anti-consumer used game policy and crucially, the mandatory internet connection issues break the end-product for me.

Having suffered Microsoft's shocking Games For Windows Live for years - just wait until you are not allowed to play the game you paid for because of Microsoft connection problems. It is so utterly infuriating that I know I would cause damage to my home. To have set aside some precious time for gaming, and to be set up to play your new favourite game that you have eagerly anticipated, and then to be not allowed to play that game because Microsoft's servers are being tempermental, or your own internet connection is on the blink or whatever the multitude of reasons were (and will be!) causes a very, very special anger, for which I will never forgive Microsoft and which I never wish to endure again.

Just you wait.

ShadowHearth wrote: »

It will be shocking if they will do it. In a good way though. It would show that there is point voicing your opinion and fight back the stupid policies these huge corporation implement.

If they will really revert it to normal, then Xbox one would be back on this list of devices to get.

Tolerating this kind of thing is putting gaming on a fast track to more restrictions. I'm glad people are speaking out anyway.

Richard Dower wrote: »

http://news.xbox.com/2013/05/qa

Page can't be found.