hazzi Posted May 26, 2013 Share Posted May 26, 2013 I never heard any complaints about the controller being 'too symmetrical' when it was the PS2, maybe I'm more used to the PS controller, but the Xbox controller just feels clunky and out of place, I don't like it at all. That's because you barely ever had to use the thumbticks on the PS2. Now they're a necessity for every game. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dunning1874 Posted May 26, 2013 Share Posted May 26, 2013 That's because you barely ever had to use the thumbticks on the PS2. Now they're a necessity for every game. Exactly, the right thumbstick was pretty much redundant on the PS2. Now that both thumbsticks are widely used, the design needs to move away from symmetry. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
WFAANW Posted May 26, 2013 Share Posted May 26, 2013 PS4 seems better for gaming as it has the better exclusives. Whereas Xbox is only given you exclusive content in COD and FIFA and there shit anyway. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Stewbo Posted May 27, 2013 Share Posted May 27, 2013 Has the Xbox One reveal swayed anyone then? Yes, 100% toward PS4 Im still leaning towards PS4, that reveal told me less than f**k all Ultimately i wanted to know its backwards compatability and if its always online, they didnt mention either. Confirmed elsewhere that it is not backward compatible and is kind of always online (needs to connect to internet at least once per day) It looks quite sexy. I first had an PS3 but then it packed in so I got an Xbox 360. 3 years later and it's still going strong. The XboxOne is looking very good so far I think. Wireless N connectivity is very decent when it comes to WiFi signal, and the 500Gb HD out of the box will be more than enough storage. The switching between the Xbox OS and Windows 8 OS is also very positive. No chance since all games are required to be installed before you can play them. If you download a lot of DLC or movies as well as playing a lot of games that will be eaten up very quickly Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Stewbo Posted May 27, 2013 Share Posted May 27, 2013 It, along with the PS4 reveal, has swayed me towards giving serious consideration to finally converting to PC gaming. This. Do eeeeet PC Gaming is a total money sink. I do love it, but about a year after getting a top of the range PC it's mediocre. But it costs very little to keep it at the top end. Bear in mind the consoles will be mediocre in that same time period and are not capable of being improved. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bunglebonce Posted May 27, 2013 Share Posted May 27, 2013 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
madwullie Posted May 27, 2013 Share Posted May 27, 2013 Do eeeeet But it costs very little to keep it at the top end. Bear in mind the consoles will be mediocre in that same time period and are not capable of being improved. I bought an xbox 360 6 years ago. It still plays the latest games, to their highest level. I've replaced my gaming PC twice in that time, and my most recent one has had a GFX card upgrade on top of that. I vastly prefer PC Gaming (esp FPS and strategy games) but it is not as cost effective as console gaming, even factoring in "savings" that can be made in terms of "buying" games. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gaz Posted May 27, 2013 Share Posted May 27, 2013 "Or, at the very least... buy a Wii-U" :lol: Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
#Gary Posted May 27, 2013 Share Posted May 27, 2013 No chance since all games are required to be installed before you can play them. If you download a lot of DLC or movies as well as playing a lot of games that will be eaten up very quickly Games are stored in the cloud though... I honestly can't wait for E3 because there's going to be a lot of backtracking. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
WFAANW Posted May 27, 2013 Share Posted May 27, 2013 Fake of course, but makes a good point. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Stewbo Posted May 27, 2013 Share Posted May 27, 2013 I bought an xbox 360 6 years ago. It still plays the latest games, to their highest level. I've replaced my gaming PC twice in that time, and my most recent one has had a GFX card upgrade on top of that. I vastly prefer PC Gaming (esp FPS and strategy games) but it is not as cost effective as console gaming, even factoring in "savings" that can be made in terms of "buying" games. it does play the best games sure, but graphically you can see how they show their age in comparison to PC games (Metro and Bioshock Infinite are a couple of good examples). I havent had to upgrade my PC yet but it has a pretty good processor, plenty of RAM and a good graphics card so I dont anticipate having to do much work over the next 12 months to keep it in top condition. The first thing to go will likely be the storage since I opted for a less expensive hardrive, then the RAM which is less than the price of a game to double. After that is when it starts to get expensive but I'll be shocked if I need a new processor in less than 2 years time and even then the high end ones just now will be a lot cheaper. Games are stored in the cloud though... I honestly can't wait for E3 because there's going to be a lot of backtracking. I think thats just save files, it would defeat the purpose of installation if it was just floating on the internet Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
~~~ Posted May 28, 2013 Share Posted May 28, 2013 Can't play my 360 games on the new Xbox? Microsoft can f**k right off Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Homer Thompson Posted May 28, 2013 Share Posted May 28, 2013 I think thats just save files, it would defeat the purpose of installation if it was just floating on the internet The piece I read said that games were installed onto the hard drive but developers could choose to use the cloud to handle some of the processing, meaning, hypothetically, they have more processing power to call on than just whats in the console themselves. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
KeeperDee Posted May 28, 2013 Share Posted May 28, 2013 The piece I read said that games were installed onto the hard drive but developers could choose to use the cloud to handle some of the processing, meaning, hypothetically, they have more processing power to call on than just whats in the console themselves. Indeed. It seems some of the processing will be done server side instead of client side which could rocket the standard of graphics. Sent from my GT-I9505 using Pie & Bovril mobile app Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Homer Thompson Posted May 28, 2013 Share Posted May 28, 2013 Indeed. It seems some of the processing will be done server side instead of client side which could rocket the standard of graphics. Sent from my GT-I9505 using Pie & Bovril mobile app I think "could" is the important word though. The downside, of course, is that you would need to be connected to the internet to play the games. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
KeeperDee Posted May 28, 2013 Share Posted May 28, 2013 I think "could" is the important word though. The downside, of course, is that you would need to be connected to the internet to play the games. I guess it could possibly be an option? Like you could turn on server side processing in the settings or something? Sent from my GT-I9505 using Pie & Bovril mobile app Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Homer Thompson Posted May 28, 2013 Share Posted May 28, 2013 I guess it could possibly be an option? Like you could turn on server side processing in the settings or something? Sent from my GT-I9505 using Pie & Bovril mobile app Maybe. The article I read implied that it was the developers choice. If they chose to program the game that way then you would need to have a constant internet connection to play it. I cant see too many developers releasing two different versions of the same game, although I guess its possible - "Call of Duty - Enhanced edition". Server side processing and another £10 on the price Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
weirdcal Posted May 28, 2013 Share Posted May 28, 2013 I think "could" is the important word though. The downside, of course, is that you would need to be connected to the internet to play the games. I guess it could possibly be an option? Like you could turn on server side processing in the settings or something? Sent from my GT-I9505 using Pie & Bovril mobile app what if the multiplayer aspect was server side processing while the local player variant was xbox one processed ? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GiGi Posted May 28, 2013 Share Posted May 28, 2013 PC Gaming is a total money sink. I do love it, but about a year after getting a top of the range PC it's mediocre. Mediocre in what way? The hardware moves faster than the games so you should never be behind on requirements even for the newest games for a good couple of years with recent generation kit. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Homer Thompson Posted May 28, 2013 Share Posted May 28, 2013 what if the multiplayer aspect was server side processing while the local player variant was xbox one processed ? Not sure what the point would be. You'd still be developing, effectively, two different games. I dont see any reason why the developers will give a toss about a constant online connection. If they want to insist you have it then thats it. They wont be spending any more time developing alternatives just so you dont have to be constantly online Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.