Is it really that bad that the new Xbox is weaker?
- Thread starter Klaw117
- Start date
The reason there are no mods on consoles isn't technical but a matter of policy.Scrumpmonkey said:
It's because the Console companies doesn't want everyone to have the ability to make something for the system and just be able to share it. Because these companies want to have a share of revenue for every single thing that is available on the system. And free stuff doesn't give them revenue,they can't get a cut out of nothing.
Now as you put,yes,a console is a computer system that is locked.
Technically,it can do whatever a computer can do with the same specs,it could even run spreadsheets and word processors.
What differentiates it is that the operating system is locked to run only on the specific hardware,and that you have the company producing this hardware to demand a cut of every single thing that is released to run on that system.
It's a "walled garden" as they say. It's something that looks beautiful and you like it as it is,but has walls all around the edges so you can't expand it.
In the past they used to say that a console is a machine designed from the ground up to be perfect to play video games. But that doesn't seem to be so true these days,and for various reasons. I remember a time were consoles used to be significantly less expensive to acquire than computers,and at some cases played games better than computers. And gaming companies did research and development to find new cool ways of enhancing games,force feedback,analogue sticks,memory cards so you can save anywhere... And there were also innovation gameplay-wise with cutscenes,voice overs,and other things appearing.These things were very cool back when they first appeared,and the biggest thing is that they appeared all together on about the same console generation. As time passed though the introduction of new features of such kind slowed down,and the focus shifted onto other things. dvd playback,mp3 song playback,blu ray playback,movie rental services through the consoles...
Perhaps the new stuff that is not related to games wouldn't hurt if at the same time innovation on actual game related things kept with the same pace. But these are different times. Instead of having the majority of devs and companies trying to find unique things to do to excite players,most of them do the opposite and copy features from other franchises,thus we end up with more games playing the same way than before.
Still you have gameplay innovation coming every now and then,but it has become quite more rare in the last decade.
I might sound nostalgic,and perhaps I am somewhat,but the decade of 90s seemed way more innovative to me than that of 2000s.
In the 90s there were 2 major new genres,the FPSs and fighting games like Mortal Kombat,and so many other things were introduced like force feedback,analogue sticks,3d environments and characters,day-night cycles,voice-overs,cutscenes..
What the decade of 2000s gave us was games like the Sims and Farmville,motion controls,and iron sights.
Perhaps motion controls could have more potential if they were accurate enough to do 1:1 movement translation,without latency,and where used in games other than simplified casual games,but weren't forced to games that didn't needed them.
For me iron sights only slowed down the pacing of gameplay,and while I accept that some people prefer it,personally I prefer the good old mechanism of having your gun hitting where your crosshair is without the game punishing you and spreading the bullets on purpose for some obscure reason.
But I have positive thinking and I wish that the decade of 2010-2020 will be more innovative than 2000-2010.
We already had a new 'genre',Minecraft,and Valve with Oculus are going to bring Virtual Reality.I have some doubts but quite a number of people who have tried it,say that VR might be the next 'big leap' in video games,like the transition from 2d to 3d environments was. Who knows ? I wish it's that good,but it remains to be seen.
As I mentioned in another thread, you should check out Microsoft's exclusive new 'Tiled Resources' technology, which basically allows memory usage to be severely reduced for the likes of textures, only using small areas of them (tiles) at a time, thus allowing a planet covered in 3Gb of textures to be rendered at the highest level of quality whilst only taking up 16Mb of RAM.
The difference between the two systems is almost entirely meaningless, and anyone who truly cares about that probably doesn't seem to understand that most games are going to be ported over to both systems. Both consoles have more power than they'll likely ever truly need, and unless you're thinking of mining Bitcoins or attempting real-time ray-tracing or running some other software that requires the highest specifications possible, it seems utterly meaningless to compare the two.
If you think that games for Xbox are going to be terrible, or that both the PS4 and XBox common titles will have any noticeable differences? I highly doubt it.
The difference between the two systems is almost entirely meaningless, and anyone who truly cares about that probably doesn't seem to understand that most games are going to be ported over to both systems. Both consoles have more power than they'll likely ever truly need, and unless you're thinking of mining Bitcoins or attempting real-time ray-tracing or running some other software that requires the highest specifications possible, it seems utterly meaningless to compare the two.
If you think that games for Xbox are going to be terrible, or that both the PS4 and XBox common titles will have any noticeable differences? I highly doubt it.
It doesn't seem to matter now, but in a few years when they're struggling to squeeze every last polygon out of consoles and they have to -really- reduce the quality on Xbox, it will show.
Think Xbox 360 vs. PS3 versions of games like Fallout 3, Skyrim, New Crapas, etc. The xbox was much better looking, loaded faster, had less crashes and glitches, and overall was easier to pick up and play.
Think Xbox 360 vs. PS3 versions of games like Fallout 3, Skyrim, New Crapas, etc. The xbox was much better looking, loaded faster, had less crashes and glitches, and overall was easier to pick up and play.
The consensus seems to be that the graphics issue alone isn't a big deal, but in combination with other issues, it becomes more important. It seems like the new Xbox has too many negative aspects and nearly no positive aspects to compensate while the PlayStation 2 had more than enough positive aspects to compensate for its negative aspects. Plus, the PlayStation 2's graphical capabilities didn't have to meet a standard while the new Xbox's did and failed to do so despite advertising that it could and was superior at doing so.
That being said, could you see the new Xbox rebounding from this? Microsoft pretty much has to do a price cut and a Kinect-less version if it wants to remain competitive and I will be VERY surprised if it's stupid enough not to do this. However, do you think Microsoft's developers could come out with enough good exclusives to make the new Xbox competitive enough?
That being said, could you see the new Xbox rebounding from this? Microsoft pretty much has to do a price cut and a Kinect-less version if it wants to remain competitive and I will be VERY surprised if it's stupid enough not to do this. However, do you think Microsoft's developers could come out with enough good exclusives to make the new Xbox competitive enough?
Good point... especially when I saw an article on IGN today that the new Killzone multiplayer isnt 1080p like it was originally claimed to be, either. I have a feeling you will NOT see the same uproar, if anything at all about that, because the sony fanboys will keep their traps shut. (No disrespect to playstation fans in general, just the aggravating offshoot)Requia said:
Is there any reason to buy a weaker console?
Take all the loyalty and exclusive away, and I really can't see why anyone would.
Not that I'm saying "You're making the wrong choice" for buying either console based on reasons of loyalty, etc.
But, at the end of the day, you have two machines. One is more powerful than the other.
Take all the loyalty and exclusive away, and I really can't see why anyone would.
Not that I'm saying "You're making the wrong choice" for buying either console based on reasons of loyalty, etc.
But, at the end of the day, you have two machines. One is more powerful than the other.
The PS3 was technically more powerful than the 360, but I can't think of an example of when I ever noticed it. In most cases the 360 games looked better.
The difference is a bit more pronounced in regards to the Xone vs PS4, however to me it's all about the games.
The difference is a bit more pronounced in regards to the Xone vs PS4, however to me it's all about the games.
Like many posters have said, Mircosoft billed it as this all powerful thing, so when the facts come out and it's weaker, it's a huge problem for those that want to buy the more powerful system.
When most of the games each console gets are mostly the same, why would anyone buy the lower spec system?
When most of the games each console gets are mostly the same, why would anyone buy the lower spec system?
I have never even considered that mandatory installation could be seen as a drawback for PC.Scrumpmonkey said:
Haha! For a minute I thought you meant the new Xbox was weaker than the previous one (360)! 
Yes that would be bad since we're moving in the wrong direction!
It's not deal-breaking but it's certainly a point in favour of the PS4. The fact that the PS4 is cheaper only adds insult to injury.
Yes that would be bad since we're moving in the wrong direction!It's not deal-breaking but it's certainly a point in favour of the PS4. The fact that the PS4 is cheaper only adds insult to injury.