I'm keeping it. I keep all my consoles. Someday I'll have a collection of gaming's past (and possibly quiet a bit of money if any of them become rare).
A question to console owners
- Thread starter Oktanas
- Start date
Recommended Videos
Unless EVERY game it can play is playable on the Next Gen, I'll keep it.
Side Note:You should work on that grammar and spelling my friend...
Side Note:You should work on that grammar and spelling my friend...
You have no idea what you're talking about, do you?Phasmal said:
Saying that you need to have a top of the line computer at all times, with the absolute latest hardware, is like saying you have to go out and purchase every single new TV that comes out - you really, really don't.
PCs last as long, if not longer than, consoles unless you have OCD and need to upgrade every part every time something new comes out.
My previous PC lasted me 8 years. Hell, it would have lasted me longer but I had a spare $500 and decided to upgrade to a fairly new one that will last me another 8 to 10 years. Could I play everything on absolute maximum settings? No, BF3 ran at about 3 FPS on max settings, but on medium it ran about 80, and Crysis was fine on max.
There really is no need to upgrade your computer every five minutes. Its a waste of time and money, and something that almost nobody does.
One issue I have with backwards compatibility is that in previous generations, iterations in a series would sometimes use memory card data from previous games to unlock extras (this was before DLC, back when you were rewarded for supporting a game series by simply buying the next and previous titles). You can't do this when they upgrade consoles without backwards compatibility. I know it's small but there's more.
Another issue is that we may hold onto our old consoles but they will eventually break down. By that time they won't make that console anymore and people online will either be selling them in bad condition or at a high price because it's "collectable".
Third issue: It's such an obvious cash grab because, more with the PS3 at least, they're re-releasing the previous generation games with updated graphics in lieu of backwards compatability. This means you have to buy the games you already own and still have no access to your save data.
And finally, this is more my issue than anyone elses so I suppose it doesn't count, but my entertainment unit is super heavy and really big so it's virtually impossible to get to the cables behind it without moving it and it's virtually impossible to move period. So yeah, for me it kind of is that hard to change a cable.
They may seem like small problems but it all just seems like a slap in the face to loyal consumers who are willing to pay a good $400+ to keep playing they're games.
Another issue is that we may hold onto our old consoles but they will eventually break down. By that time they won't make that console anymore and people online will either be selling them in bad condition or at a high price because it's "collectable".
Third issue: It's such an obvious cash grab because, more with the PS3 at least, they're re-releasing the previous generation games with updated graphics in lieu of backwards compatability. This means you have to buy the games you already own and still have no access to your save data.
And finally, this is more my issue than anyone elses so I suppose it doesn't count, but my entertainment unit is super heavy and really big so it's virtually impossible to get to the cables behind it without moving it and it's virtually impossible to move period. So yeah, for me it kind of is that hard to change a cable.
They may seem like small problems but it all just seems like a slap in the face to loyal consumers who are willing to pay a good $400+ to keep playing they're games.
Pretty much this.Soxafloppin said:
I've only bought about 20-40 new games and around 200+ throughout my gaming life. So, if they ban used games I will keep my 360 forever!
I would keep it deffo.
Under my TV is sat... Mega drive, game cube,ps 2,ps3, xbox360. I have a ps1 but as the ps2 is backward compatible i don't need it wired in x).
I can't bring myself to throw consoles away, to many awesmoe memorys and nostalga attatched to them :3
Under my TV is sat... Mega drive, game cube,ps 2,ps3, xbox360. I have a ps1 but as the ps2 is backward compatible i don't need it wired in x).
I can't bring myself to throw consoles away, to many awesmoe memorys and nostalga attatched to them :3
I'm quite attached to the current generation of games. Doesn't matter if Microsoft were to release a new Xbox next year or in three years time, I'd still demand flawless backwards compatibility. I just bought my friend's old Slim because another disc tray from the original 360s died on me and I wasn't gonna pay MS (again) to send me another console that may not breakdown.
Seriously Microsoft, get your shit together.
Seriously Microsoft, get your shit together.
But being a console game also encourages people to move with the times and play only the latest system and technology. Also, the console gamers aren't greedy. We don't need the promise of being able to play everything to keep us going. We also trust our memories and do not need to save everything either.Aprilgold said:
Besides, if we need to go back in time, playstation 3 and 360 already have that ability. We are capable of playing select titles from last generation on both and even more from 2 generations ago on the ps3. We have the ability to do so. We just don't see it as another notch in this mythical and meaningless "why PC is better" debate.
I highly doubt I'll be buying any next gen console at launch, mainly because they're usually ridiculously overpriced with no good games.
Now this is ironic.malestrithe said:
Yet by standard principles, especially now I would not call the Xbox 360 or PS3 'cutting edge.' Its like calling the radio, today, a cutting edge piece of technology that will totally change how we listen to music. How do these two relate is the most likely question? You see, similar to the radio, consoles are quite old when it comes to the technological curve. A radio, while a major milestone for broadcasting or music-listening is not the most cutting edge thing in both fields. There have been other examples of better 'radios' so-to-speak which involves things like Twitch TV, Podcasting software along with more, less notable ones.
A console, on the basis that it can not be upgraded until a generation ends ensures that, on day of release it is already falling behind on the technological-curve. You can't pull out the video card from the console and install a new one like you can a PC. You can't just take a part from a console and then insert it into its slot and expect it to still function properly. However, on a PC I can customize, switch and swap-it to my heart's content and it will run fine as long as I didn't forget to install it or didn't plug-it-in properly.
I also love this here as well.
I never said that we needed the guarantee to play everything. Your throwing a hissy-fit over nothing here. But I'll elaborate on this point like I did your last one.
The accusation that I am greedy for simply being able to play games that are so old now that they can't run on modern anything is like saying people who play music through MP3 files are greedy bastards for not using exclusively Records for their music pleasure.
Money is a main problem when it comes to retro gaming, the older the more daring and dodgy the things your buying become and the harder it is to get the system you just spent thousands on for the games and the hardware to work. I don't know about you, but I don't have thousands to spend on something that may or may not work.
On the aspect though, how else are you going to play the Dos now in days aside from the Dos itself or Dos-Box? No modern PC can run Dos anymore, the program is to old to work.
While here, covering the same topic again, consoles are behind the times because you can't just swap out the standard Xbox Video Card for the newest Nvidia Video-Card and expect it to work. On PC you could, but not on the Xbox.
At the risk of sounding Elitist like its a bad thing, yes PC is better. PC has been better for the past few years. We lack having to enter several codes to play our games. We lack discs for which can break. We lack having to leave the house to buy our games. I can buy that shit through my damn phone, tell it to download and play it once I get home from work. We lack stores that cause publishers to gain less money for their game. We lack a used-games section, which is actually bad unlike the rest. We lack the space needed to house game boxes. We do not lack a thriving independent scene. We do not lack the customization of our platform and we are not behind the times by 5 or so years. We don't lack strict-publishers, shutting down game makers if they don't reach a certain mystic score or make a certain amount of money.
PC has been better for the past few years because of the rising of Steam and the fact that publishers are fully cut out of the picture on the PC. No game idea can be told no to being sold because it may affect their bottom line. Games like Legend of Grimrock would never damn see a shelf-life because of things like publishers. What has the indie scene for consoles been like? What very-small-indie-games got a shelf life on consoles as of late? What new software has Xbox upgraded to over the 360s life span?
To end it, PC is better on the basis that it lacks many of consoles problems. I could care less that I sound elitist but what giant-benefits are coming to console in the next generation? The ability for ads to just pop-in and say "YO, BUY DIS DRINK DOG F8 DAT GAMER DAT IS YO!" while your in the middle of something. For ads to be interactive. To have to pay more for playing online, despite you already having a connection to the internet?
OH WOOPS, FORGOT THE "MY OPINION" PART OF THIS! I tried to ground most of this in fact, but that doesn't mean that I'm not colored into liking PC's more, this is just a disclaimer so that your aware that this is not 100% unbiased truth, because it is biased.
I answered the OP's question earlier, I'll do it agian here. Unlike most PC players who never gain or essentially lose space unless they get a gaming laptop, console gamers will more then likely have to keep their consoles to play their old games with their current saves or just able to play their games at-all if there is no backwards capability, and if there is capability backwards they'll sell their console and keep the newer one.
I probably won't buy one... there isn't much variety between the consoles anymore and I'm more into PC gaming even though for most of my life it's been strictly consoles.
And backwards capability because you have to go to special measures to repair and hook up older systems now, and anyways... it's a nice feature
, there are a lot of awesome older games.
And backwards capability because you have to go to special measures to repair and hook up older systems now, and anyways... it's a nice feature
, there are a lot of awesome older games.
Yeah, the backwards compatibility is for people who don't have the old consoles then...Oktanas said:
I'll keep the PS3 around, just like I did every console from the Atari 2600 on up to the PS2. Backwards compatibility is a funny thing... my PC actually plays PS1 games better than my PS2 or PS3 do. Truth be told, it plays 'em better than my old PS1 does...