Now that all the leaks/announcements are rolling in, it seemed like a good time to make a post.

Predictions?

I dont own a next gen system yet. But I will pick one up for that game.

November 8th, 2005 The greatest night in the history of GD!

3 years after the fact.

-30-
You know it's drama, but it sound real good.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=D2-bWotLKqo

2017. no specific dates but SE did confirm a western release

this is a remaster based on the japan-only "international zodiac job system" (IZJS) edition which is mostly vanilla XII with restricted license boards, plus additional items, spells, techniques, and a fast forward button

the trailer makes the game look very good, better than i thought it would look. seems like they've added some lighting effects. the textures look about the same but i imagine they'll clean those up. i played through IZJS on pcsx2 some months ago and was amazed by how good it looked when upscaled. the FFX remaster is rock solid so it stands to reason that zodiac age should be good but don't expect 60fps since xii is hard coded at 30

They showed a new trailer and multiplayer footage.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4pY3hlQEOc0

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=x-HWKnjugDo

I usually hold off on Battlefield until they repackage it with DLC but this is looking mightily like a day one purchase.

If the story turns out to be good (I hear they almost never are with these games) I might check that out if and when the game is cheaper but if I HAD to pick a multiplayer focused shooter I'd be leaning TItanfall right now. It's hard to argue that multiplaye footage looked anything less than amazing and Respawn don't have a sub standard solo campaign pedigree to contend with (yet).


That said, if you want to see what it looks like when EA pays a number of hip-hop celebrities to go play Battlefield 1 multiplayer with several pro gamers and an esports event host interview those celebrities immediately after Snoop Dogg and Wiz Khalifa appear to have gotten them VERY high, click this link: https://youtu.be/ZFdzwACtlhs?t=6451


That was an amazing 15 minutes. (It ends at roughly 2 hours in, though that's also roughly where the multiplayer match begins so if you didn't flip over to that stream you can see that footage there. Probably on EA's Youtube account without the additional commentary as well.)


~~~~~~~~~
"This is the streets, and I am the trap." � Jay Bilas
http://www.popmatters.com/pm/archive/contributor/517
Hip Hop Handbook: http://tinyurl.com/ll4kzz

had me whoopin and hollerin like a youtuber making a reaction video.

That titan ejection into mid-air grapple melee?? Niggaaa.

Titanfall is still the only game I've put any significant time into on Xbox. That shit was way too dope to fade away like it did. Hopefully the campaign and extra content will give this new one a longer life.

-30-
You know it's drama, but it sound real good.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=txJGHjTBS_M

these are the games I love now; atmospheric and immersive without cutscene fodder or encyclopedic directives. on my Joaquin Phoenix in a Spike Jonze movie.

--------

EA CONFERENCE:

• NBA 2K16's story mode was such a trainwreck (listen to this 11 minute synopsis of it here: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=isSzgqtV_Wg). I hope FIFA's can top it (though I'm not sure if I'd prefer it be better or worse). That monologue was...something.

• Battlefield 1 looks amazing. Still not interested in the series but it looks like they're doing cool things with the multiplayer, especially the zeppelins.

• I want to see more of that Visceral Star Wars game as soon as possible.

• Really, I want to see more of all the Star Wars games, because graphics and sound design have got to the point there's really no excuse for a bad Star Wars game.

• Titanfall 2 has already made me jealous of people who can get deep into a competitive multiplayer FPS. Hottest sizzle reel in a while.

• The Mass Effect universe still has the best sci-fi aesthetic in video games. I wish we knew what that game actually plans to be, though.

• Snoop's blunt, long may it burn.


BETHESDA CONFERENCE

• Dishonored 2 looks stellar, but the gameplay clips didn't completely grab me. Neither did the first. Pre-order bonus of a free copy of the first is a bit enticing, though, just to see if I'm wrong.

• The free DOOM DLC sounds pretty neat. The paid DLC sounds pretty dumb.

• The reverence I have for DOOM obviously never existed for Quake, but for multiplayer fans I hope id can nail that throwback the way they have with DOOM.

• Fallout 3 was a good double-rental I never finished, I still have The Witcher 3 to play now that all the DLC is out, and Fallout 4 always looked like the definition of Too Much. All that Fallout DLC read as Even More Too Much, Like Way Too Much, but amusement park will probably be a great setting.

• I never played Prey, I don't even know what it is to be honest (I think I picture F.E.A.R. when Prey gets mentioned, another game I've never played or seen much of) but this reboot or whatever looks like it could be fucking rad.

• I never played Skyrim because it was the closest a PS3 game ever came to digital HIV for hard drives. I might play Skyrim. If PS4 gets the Macho Man Dragons mod.



~~~~~~~~~
"This is the streets, and I am the trap." � Jay Bilas
http://www.popmatters.com/pm/archive/contributor/517
Hip Hop Handbook: http://tinyurl.com/ll4kzz

It's in between a sea of killers sandwiched a week after Battlefield 1 release date and a week before and COD's. Considering its the same publisher as Battlefield (EA) it makes you wonder what they are thinking. But my fav multiplayer this gen, I hope it gets a bigger spotlight this time around.

Battlefield looks insane and with all the future war stuff its nice to get closer to 'back to the basics'.

*I'll likely never own a Microsoft console since I've never liked how their paddle feels, but I always enjoy their conferences


• Microsoft Play Anywhere is a really cool feature even if I'll likely not own a PC either (at least until Microsoft / Sony become publishers on the PC platform and consoles are dead)

• Gears of War 4 looks like it'll have really cool set pieces. I did not enjoy playing Gears 2 at friends' houses in high school. Dialogue appeared terrible.

• I've been jealous of KI's exclusivity for a while now

• Forza Horizon 3 looked pretty damn cool. I wish the Gran Turismo franchise would take some similar chances.

• recore looks like a game.

• I am so fucking curious about Final Fantasy XV. Every news release says so much about it without saying anything at all, with so many "we are planning on this but it might not work out" comments. It looks gorgeous, but that Cerberus demo showed nothing and the demo they just showed was a mess.

• I will never play Minecraft. I'm honestly surprised it isn't free to play at this point though.

• Still jealous of Cuphead. That moon thing looked cool.Excited to see Stardew Valley mentioned, means console stuff is around the corner. Really want to play that. Hope Inside isn't a console exclusive but I wouldn't be surprised.

• We Happy Few looks very cool. Wonder what kind of game it is but that seems like a real interesting world.

• Gwent felt like a personal offense considering how huge and long Witcher 3 already was / is. I'm amazed anybody even took the time to figure that out let alone it became popular enough to become standalone.

• Tekken 7 looks very curious. Seems to be leaning into mechanics like the DC MK games, maybe just for story mode?

• Never played a Dead Rising game. I'd really like to play that one. Bummer.

• Scalebound makes me want a follow up to that Devil May Cry remake. The game itself looks really boring.

• Sea of Thieves looked interesting but it looked like it was entirely built for Youtubers and people with a lot of game playing friends. I'm neither.

• Scorpio sounds wild, but I'm still in a pretty hesitant camp being a console gamer, and someone who's been solely Playstation since the PS2. If consoles going forward will just be backwards compatible by the simple fact they are now designed like PCs are, why would I (or the 40 million other PS4 owners) ever get an XBox if they've switched to mostly digital purchases on their current PS4?

• And forgetting that, if my PS4 still plays all the games the PS Neo does, they just look a little less impressive, and there's not a subsidy plan for either of these consoles so the upgrades are costing $300-$500 rather than what this model is being compared to, phones, which regularly cost less than $100 thanks to wireless carrier contracts...does ANYONE want to spend that much money on their video game console every few years? I understand PC gamers do, but console gamers are not used to that, oftentimes buy into consoles specifically to dodge that bullet.

• Very well done press conference though, really positive energy and a lot of cool announcements that raise interesting questions and showed some really cool games, several of which make me jealous as a PS4 owner, at least for the next few hours.

I'm sure the Neo isn't going to be as beast as the Scorpio specs. It seems like next year will be big for Xbox. They'll have to announce some heat to take advantage of that hardware.

As an Xbox One owner THIS YEAR tho, none of the big games interested me. At all. At all, at all. They all looked hella basic. Even Recore, which I had been intersted in, was looking sparse (but the Mega Man heritage was evident, so I'll keep an open mind).

Cuphead, We Happy Few, Below, and Inside are like the only games I'm looking forward to actually buying. Which is cool, indies and downloadables is my shit.

-30-
You know it's drama, but it sound real good.

>I'm sure the Neo isn't going to be as beast as the Scorpio
>specs. It seems like next year will be big for Xbox. They'll
>have to announce some heat to take advantage of that
>hardware.
>


Is that they did not explicitly say, as Sony has, that XBox One must play Scorpio games. Only that Scorpio will play all XBox One games. And Todd Howard's quote during their developer montage, about how this upgrade is the only way they can make Fallout 4 VR a console reality, leaves the question feeling slightly answered: Microsoft may be prepared to leave their initial install base behind and hope they can pull a lot of their 360 audience that jumped ship to PS4 for the lead console advantages back, XBox One owners be damned.

It makes you wonder if Sony ends up having to put out ANOTHER PS4 two years after the Neo and power becomes perpetually staggered between the two publishers?

It's going to be a weird half-decade for console gaming.


~~~~~~~~~
"This is the streets, and I am the trap." � Jay Bilas
http://www.popmatters.com/pm/archive/contributor/517
Hip Hop Handbook: http://tinyurl.com/ll4kzz

we get the Xbox One KitKat.

PS4.5 and PS4 will share a library, then the PS5 will come out and drop PS4 support. Then the PS5.5 will drop PS4.5 support.

If the updates are spread out every three years, a console will stay current for six years, which is about the length of a traditional console generation.

-30-
You know it's drama, but it sound real good.

Might as well get a PC at this point, and upgrade a component every three years, no?

Whatever price PS4.5/Scorpio launch at will still be less expensive than building a whole gaming PC of comparable power.

I'm guessing the entry price is not going to be at the same tier as a launch PS4 or X1.

At least $600 seems reasonable, and I wouldn't be surprised if it was higher. This is basically the "luxury" tier console, right?

For $600 you won't get a comparable PC, but you also won't be locked into this weird console "upgrade" paradigm that we seem to be entering now.

I think Sony and MS learned the lesson of not to price shit that high with the PS3 and Xbone, respectively.

>I'm guessing the entry price is not going to be at the same
>tier as a launch PS4 or X1.
>
>At least $600 seems reasonable, and I wouldn't be surprised if
>it was higher. This is basically the "luxury" tier console,
>right?

Nah, I think this is more like how Apple phones/tablets get a spec bump every (other) year. The 6s had a 70% faster processor, 90% faster GPU, and double the RAM of the 6 but didn't go up in price at all. I think we'll see a very similar model from Sony and MS where they have a spec bumped console at the $400 mark every few years, freeing them up to sell the older models at $200 - $300, which is where the bulk of install bases have traditionally come from in console life cycles.

>
>For $600 you won't get a comparable PC, but you also won't be
>locked into this weird console "upgrade" paradigm that we seem
>to be entering now.

Very true. There's definitely pluses to going the PC route, but it's pretty much always going to cost you more to keep up with console performance let alone beat it.

I'd be shocked if it was $400. You're not acknowledging that these new consoles aren't going to replace the X1/PS4, they're going to coexist alongside them. The X1S is basically going to be the new "entry level" model at $299 and Scorpio has already been labelled as "the most powerful console ever built".

But this isn't the first foray into a new generation, it's an iteration on an existing one. The userbase for games is already established so they don't need to aggressively price this one to sell units. As a comparison, look at the success for the $150 Xbox Elite controller. Despite the initial hesitation on the price point, the controller was sold out basically well into holiday season. There's a burgeoning market for luxury goods these days, and gaming is no exception.

>I think Sony and MS learned the lesson of not to price shit
>that high with the PS3 and Xbone, respectively.
>
>>I'm guessing the entry price is not going to be at the same
>>tier as a launch PS4 or X1.

It absolutely will be, and probably higher.


>>At least $600 seems reasonable, and I wouldn't be surprised
>if
>>it was higher. This is basically the "luxury" tier console,
>>right?
>
>Nah, I think this is more like how Apple phones/tablets get a
>spec bump every (other) year. The 6s had a 70% faster
>processor, 90% faster GPU, and double the RAM of the 6 but
>didn't go up in price at all. I think we'll see a very similar
>model from Sony and MS where they have a spec bumped console
>at the $400 mark every few years, freeing them up to sell the
>older models at $200 - $300, which is where the bulk of
>install bases have traditionally come from in console life
>cycles.


Comparing a product that has had more iterations in 4-5 years to one with fewer iterations in 15 years doesn't really make sense though. The iPhone refresh cycle is yearly; it's apples and oranges to compare it with a device that (until now) refreshed every 7-10 years.

The comparison is worsened when you factor in that video games can take well up to 5 years (for some, even longer) in development. Speaking of which....

>
>>
>>For $600 you won't get a comparable PC, but you also won't
>be
>>locked into this weird console "upgrade" paradigm that we
>seem
>>to be entering now.

The PC-ification of consoles has been mostly a great thing, because we move away from silly things like Cell processors and Kinects towards homogenized hardware and an easier time for developers.

But I think this "interim" generation is going to be a bad thing for consoles. Sure, it makes sense now because of the advent of 4k and VR technology but it's also going to set a dangerous precedent when consumers snap these things up like crazy (and they will). Devs are going to have to accommodate "outdated" hardware along with wanting to leverage the newer hardware to sell their games (see: Bungie's difficulties with Destiny for old/new gen consoles). Sony and MS are requiring devs to support the older console for now, but what happens when that's no longer the case? The refresh cycle of 7-10 years that console gamers have grown accustomed to is going to shorten because the consumers will prove to the OEM's that we will (financially) support it.


>Very true. There's definitely pluses to going the PC route,
>but it's pretty much always going to cost you more to keep up
>with console performance let alone beat it.


*eye roll*

Not this again. Unless you're a console gamer who buys like 2-3 games over the life of your console, you're going to spend money on games. And PC games are consistently, unequivocally cheaper over the life of the game. Overwatch, which sold bonkers across all three systems, released at $40 for PC, $60 for consoles. Why? Because the console OEM's set an artificial price floor for AAA games on their consoles a long, long time ago. That floor doesn't exist for PC games, and if the dev wants to cut the price on their hot/cold/revived game immediately, they can. They can't do that on consoles though.

The whole "PC is more expensive!!" argument is so tired because, for one, part of that cost is going towards your actual computer, that does computer things like programming, communications, watching porn, whatever. Then you can choose exactly how much more you want to pay for quality of gaming. Play indies all day? Totally fine with a $400 unit that does everything you want and more. Want to play Battlefield 7 on the highest settings for Twitch streaming? Drop $2000 and be good for the next five years. That's your choice.

The kicker? Both those PC units get to benefit from the fast moving PC games market, where stuff on /r/gamedeals gets persistently advertised at 40%/60%/80% off. That's the beauty of the PC market, because market competition means more games get sold at prices more people want to pay them at. Sure, PC has a (maybe) higher upfront cost, but it's made up for in the long run through actual games.

>I'd be shocked if it was $400. You're not acknowledging that
>these new consoles aren't going to replace the X1/PS4, they're
>going to coexist alongside them. The X1S is basically going
>to be the new "entry level" model at $299 and Scorpio has
>already been labelled as "the most powerful console ever
>built".

Which is exactly what Apple has done with their phones and tablets. New one gets the price of the old, old one gets discounted. "The most powerful console ever built" is basically that same "best iPhone ever" rhetoric Apple does every year as well. Each generation we get a "most powerful console ever built", as one would expect.

>But this isn't the first foray into a new generation, it's an
>iteration on an existing one. The userbase for games is
>already established so they don't need to aggressively price
>this one to sell units. As a comparison, look at the success
>for the $150 Xbox Elite controller. Despite the initial
>hesitation on the price point, the controller was sold out
>basically well into holiday season. There's a burgeoning
>market for luxury goods these days, and gaming is no
>exception.

Alright, two points here.

1.) There's precedent for accessory/specialized controllers selling at those prices, and they're such a high margin business that you don't necessarily need run-away, mainstream success. Madcatz was doing decently selling $200 fight sticks that many of us own until they fucked up and mad a bad bet on Rockband. The same can't be said for consoles. Xbox One was getting demolished at its launch price by the PS4 and PS3 was getting spanked by 360 when it was six hundred united states dollars.

2.) More importantly, Xbox One hasn't been the run away success that PS4 has been and there have been rumors for years that MS might exit the console business entirely. They absolutely need to continue to build their install base and a $500 or above console will not do that.


>Comparing a product that has had more iterations in 4-5 years
>to one with fewer iterations in 15 years doesn't really make
>sense though. The iPhone refresh cycle is yearly; it's apples
>and oranges to compare it with a device that (until now)
>refreshed every 7-10 years.

Yeah, and if they were making another system in 2020 comparing it wouldn't make sense.

But they're not.

They're moving it to a product cycle that is directly comparable to the product I'm comparing it to.

Furthermore, there hasn't been a console maker that's gone 10 years between systems. Nine years has been the absolute longest (360) gap, and that was an outlier (not to mention the 360 came out only four years after the OG Xbox).

>The comparison is worsened when you factor in that video games
>can take well up to 5 years (for some, even longer) in
>development. Speaking of which....

But, typically, they're around 18 - 24 months.


>>
>>>
>>>For $600 you won't get a comparable PC, but you also won't
>>be
>>>locked into this weird console "upgrade" paradigm that we
>>seem
>>>to be entering now.
>
>The PC-ification of consoles has been mostly a great thing,
>because we move away from silly things like Cell processors
>and Kinects towards homogenized hardware and an easier time
>for developers.
>
>But I think this "interim" generation is going to be a bad
>thing for consoles. Sure, it makes sense now because of the
>advent of 4k and VR technology but it's also going to set a
>dangerous precedent when consumers snap these things up like
>crazy (and they will). Devs are going to have to accommodate
>"outdated" hardware along with wanting to leverage the newer
>hardware to sell their games (see: Bungie's difficulties with
>Destiny for old/new gen consoles). Sony and MS are requiring
>devs to support the older console for now, but what happens
>when that's no longer the case? The refresh cycle of 7-10
>years that console gamers have grown accustomed to is going to
>shorten because the consumers will prove to the OEM's that we
>will (financially) support it.


>
>>Very true. There's definitely pluses to going the PC route,
>>but it's pretty much always going to cost you more to keep
>up
>>with console performance let alone beat it.
>
>
>*eye roll*
>
>Not this again. Unless you're a console gamer who buys like
>2-3 games over the life of your console, you're going to spend
>money on games. And PC games are consistently, unequivocally
>cheaper over the life of the game. Overwatch, which sold
>bonkers across all three systems, released at $40 for PC, $60
>for consoles. Why? Because the console OEM's set an
>artificial price floor for AAA games on their consoles a long,
>long time ago. That floor doesn't exist for PC games, and if
>the dev wants to cut the price on their hot/cold/revived game
>immediately, they can. They can't do that on consoles
>though.

Eye rolls back at ya and this 2008 logic. AAA PC and console games are almost always launching at $60 nowadays, so if you're buying games on day one like a lot of gamers are, you're pretty much saving no money.

Even Overwatch is a bad example because the console version of the game is the "Origins Edition" that comes with extra crap and also costs $60 on PC. In fact, when you go to the official website, that's the version of the game it points everybody to. Blizzard deciding not to offer the bare bones version to console owners has nothing to do with any arbitrary OEM stuff, they just want money.

Even if you aren't buying day one you aren't going to be saving much on PC. Fact is, console makers have seriously closed the gap when it comes to matching things like Steam sales, and places like Amazon and Best Buy have picked up whatever slack is left. And there are sites dedicated to cheap gaming deals

About the only place PCs have consoles beat in terms of value is the pay-to-play online. If you don't wait for discounts or shop around, that's an extra $50 a year on consoles.

>
>The whole "PC is more expensive!!" argument is so tired
>because, for one, part of that cost is going towards your
>actual computer, that does computer things like programming,
>communications, watching porn, whatever. Then you can choose
>exactly how much more you want to pay for quality of gaming.
>Play indies all day? Totally fine with a $400 unit that does
>everything you want and more. Want to play Battlefield 7 on
>the highest settings for Twitch streaming? Drop $2000 and be
>good for the next five years. That's your choice.

That only makes sense if you want to use windows and don't mind using a desktop. Most people use laptops and the most popular laptop brand is Apple. Heck, even people who game normally have a laptop or other computer that they use for regular computer stuff. I actually thought about building a PC for actual work last year, but then realized a laptop would make a lot more sense.

>The kicker? Both those PC units get to benefit from the fast
>moving PC games market, where stuff on /r/gamedeals gets
>persistently advertised at 40%/60%/80% off. That's the beauty
>of the PC market, because market competition means more games
>get sold at prices more people want to pay them at. Sure, PC
>has a (maybe) higher upfront cost, but it's made up for in the
>long run through actual games.

Again, console stuff gets pretty much the same kinds of deals nowadays.

>Which is exactly what Apple has done with their phones and
>tablets. New one gets the price of the old, old one gets
>discounted. "The most powerful console ever built" is
>basically that same "best iPhone ever" rhetoric Apple does
>every year as well. Each generation we get a "most powerful
>console ever built", as one would expect.

Except they're entirely different products. Again, refresh cycle for each is wildly different. The way to think about it is the X1S is the normal refresh we're used to, roughly equivalent to an iterative iPhone cycle. Instead what we're seeing now with Scorpio/Neo is a tangible leap in specs (mid-generation) to accommodate new technologies. That is unprecedented for consoles. We've seen weak peripherals like Sega CD, but not an entirely new unit (with games that should also support the current base unit).


>Alright, two points here.
>
>1.) There's precedent for accessory/specialized controllers
>selling at those prices, and they're such a high margin
>business that you don't necessarily need run-away, mainstream
>success. Madcatz was doing decently selling $200 fight sticks
>that many of us own until they fucked up and mad a bad bet on
>Rockband.

Sure, I agree with you here. While there's a difference between OEM and 3rd party products there's always been a niche market for premium products.

The same can't be said for consoles. Xbox One was
>getting demolished at its launch price by the PS4 and PS3 was
>getting spanked by 360 when it was six hundred united states
>dollars.

I agree with you that price was a factor in those two generations but here the context is different. Each of the consoles you mentioned was the first version in its generation.

Scorpio/Neo is not that; it's a luxury upgrade that will coexist alongside the base unit. There's going to be a group of "haves" and "have nots". Some will have better framerates, resolution, the extra bells and whistles when playing the same game as others on the weaker console. Graphical limitations affecting play has been something that PC gamers have lived with forever but is that really something we want with consoles?


>2.) More importantly, Xbox One hasn't been the run away
>success that PS4 has been and there have been rumors for years
>that MS might exit the console business entirely. They
>absolutely need to continue to build their install base and a
>$500 or above console will not do that.

Sure, no problems with that. Except both Sony and MS are doing this, not just MS. And yes, MS was outspec'd this gen on X1 so they have extra incentive to outspec Sony for the mid-gen refresh. That only adds to my prediction that the new console will cost at least $600 to start. Graphics cards aren't cheap, especially for the ones that will support VR and 4k.

>
>Yeah, and if they were making another system in 2020 comparing
>it wouldn't make sense.
>
>But they're not.
>
>They're moving it to a product cycle that is directly
>comparable to the product I'm comparing it to.
>
>Furthermore, there hasn't been a console maker that's gone 10
>years between systems. Nine years has been the absolute
>longest (360) gap, and that was an outlier (not to mention the
>360 came out only four years after the OG Xbox).

I mentioned this in the post below as well, but life cycle is not equal to refresh cycle. The most notable example is PS2, which had a game released in 2014 (PES 2014), 14 years after its release date; that's the life cycle. Sony refreshed that Playstation generation at almost 7 years, when PS3 was released late 2006. Or how the 360 still has games being released for it even though Xbox was refreshed a couple years ago with the X1. Unless a console tanks, its life cycle will typically last longer than the brand's refresh cycle.


>But, typically, they're around 18 - 24 months.


Sure, for the COD's and Assassin's Creeds of the world but not all AAA games have those franchise expectations. Heck, there's even a game at E3 that has been in development almost 10 years.



>Eye rolls back at ya and this 2008 logic. AAA PC and console
>games are almost always launching at $60 nowadays, so if
>you're buying games on day one like a lot of gamers are,
>you're pretty much saving no money.

Except that's entirely not true. Publishers set the price and they can set prices lower on PC because of distribution advantages. See here:

https://consumerist.com/2014/03/15/the-competition-is-as-fake-as-the-blood-why-new-video-games-are-always-the-same-price/

Only certain publishers like EA and Ubi set the price equivalent to the console equivalent, and that's only for their top AAA games like COD. The vast majority of flagship releases these days release at $50 or lower.

Also, not all gamers play games day 1, especially on PC. The report is from 2014, but the idea is the same: since PC gamers know the market will drop for games, they can save boatloads of money if they wait:

https://www.destructoid.com/half-of-pc-gamers-will-wait-for-a-sale-before-buying-games-281017.phtml

Also, don't forget... there is no $50 yearly "multiplayer fee" to game on PC. Did you factor that in? Owning a console for 5 years adds from $150-$250 to the cost (depends on if you can get discounts on the Live/PSN sub) and that doesn't count if your console breaks down and you need to replace it.


>Even Overwatch is a bad example because the console version of
>the game is the "Origins Edition" that comes with extra crap
>and also costs $60 on PC. In fact, when you go to the official
>website, that's the version of the game it points everybody
>to. Blizzard deciding not to offer the bare bones version to
>console owners has nothing to do with any arbitrary OEM stuff,
>they just want money.

Actually, no, like the link above stated there's a distribution mandate to price console games at $60. The "Origins Edition" crap is just to make the console version look palatable. The fact that the PC version launched at $40 (even more than the typical PC discount) is evidence that PC games price to the market, console games price to the floor.


>That only makes sense if you want to use windows and don't
>mind using a desktop. Most people use laptops and the most
>popular laptop brand is Apple.

OK? Not exactly relevant here, and you're making a lot of assumptions.

>Heck, even people who game
>normally have a laptop or other computer that they use for
>regular computer stuff. I actually thought about building a PC
>for actual work last year, but then realized a laptop would
>make a lot more sense.

Again, more assumptions. And besides, laptop or desktop, who cares how someone games? That doesn't change the fact that you're basing the PC vs Console comparison almost entirely on the upfront cost yet ignoring the costs over the life of the platform. Try to look at it all objectively. I have no dog in this fight, I own both consoles and play different games on all three (shit, I don't even have Overwatch on PC but I own it on both PS4 and X1). I don't care if someone prefers one platform over another, but I do care if someone gets something factually wrong.


>Again, console stuff gets pretty much the same kinds of deals
>nowadays.

Honest question: do you even follow PC gaming at all? This is outright, unequivocally, absolutely wrong. Seriously, browse this on a daily or weekly or monthly basis and you'll see just how quickly games shift to the market clearing price:

https://www.reddit.com/r/GameDeals/

These types of deals do NOT happen on console and the "Games for the Month" promotions are a poor facsimile (but better than nothing).

>Nah, I think this is more like how Apple phones/tablets get a
>spec bump every (other) year. The 6s had a 70% faster
>processor, 90% faster GPU, and double the RAM of the 6 but
>didn't go up in price at all. I think we'll see a very similar
>model from Sony and MS where they have a spec bumped console
>at the $400 mark every few years, freeing them up to sell the
>older models at $200 - $300, which is where the bulk of
>install bases have traditionally come from in console life
>cycles.

-30-
You know it's drama, but it sound real good.

than what we have now.

PCs will still be the more flexible and varied platform, for better and for worse.

It ain't like people will have to download new drivers or buy new graphics cards for their Xboxes. It's really more like buying a new iPad than buying a new computer.

The pros and cons of console gaming stay the same, you just have the opportunity to upgrade at a faster clip now.

-30-
You know it's drama, but it sound real good.

> It ain't like people will have to download new drivers or buy new graphics cards for their Xboxes. It's really more like buying a new iPad than buying a new computer.

It's not though. Like I stated in that post, the development cycles behind the two products are wildly different. On top of that, the development cycles on the products supporting smartphones (apps) and consoles (games) are also wildly different. The development time, time to publish and input costs are all far cheaper for apps than they are for console games.

> The pros and cons of console gaming stay the same, you just have the opportunity to upgrade at a faster clip now.

As a console gamer, this is exactly what I don't want to hear. When a major game releases, there's typically years of commitment and millions of dollars invested. What makes consoles great is the uniformity and stability of the platform. If the refresh cyle shortens from 7 years to 5ish years to 3ish years, then this means you need to keep up or you won't have access to the best version of the best game available (sound familiar?). Is that what you really want?

This is planned obsolescence, Console Version.

When the Neo or Scorpio comes out, all them PS4s and Xbones ain't obsolete. They'll still be supported for several years. And they'll be four years old when these refreshes hit the market.

It might actually extend the life cycle. If there's a danger, it's in developers holding games back powerwise to support the oldest consoles.

-30-
You know it's drama, but it sound real good.

You're conflating the two. The life cyle for the PS2 was over 10 years (released in 2000, last PS2 game released in 2014) but the refresh for Playstation was almost 7 years (PS3 released late 2006).

So yeah, like I said in post #38, the next-gen and next.5-gen consoles will coexist. Scorpio will not replace X1, Neo will not replace PS4. The new next.5 consoles will be the luxury upgrade of the current consoles. Therein lies the problem... right now Sony and MS are mandating that the current consoles will be supported for future games but for how long? Who's to say that a couple years down the line a game is going to be announced that's only available on the newest iteration of a console? These are the types of things I'm concerned about with these new announcements.

For the record, I hope I'm wrong. I do feel that 4k and VR are disrupting enough technologies that they may "require" a refresh of the current console gen to support the new games. I just hope it doesn't become a periodic thing, where a few years after each new console generation there's another "interim" refresh where those with more money are compartmentalized in their game experiences.

That's all this shit is.

Most people don't a new phone every year, even though a better version comes out every year. They buy a new phone when it starts getting less support, every two or three years.

Most people won't buy a new console every three or four years. Only enthusiasts will. Most people will buy a new console when the old one stops playing the newest games, which should continue being every six years or so.

If console makers try to force people to upgrade by making the old consoles obsolete earlier than normal, that will be hubris and the market will recede. So they won't.

The only thing that's changing is enthusiast suckers get to throw more money at slightly better boxes. Which isn't a new phenomenon at all. It's been happening since the Famicom with varying results.

-30-
You know it's drama, but it sound real good.

>That's all this shit is.
>
>Most people don't a new phone every year, even though a better
>version comes out every year. They buy a new phone when it
>starts getting less support, every two or three years.

Yet there are now carrier plans where you can buy a new phone every year, by leasing instead of buying the phone outright.

Doesn't change the fact that consoles and phones are entirely different product lines with markedly different development cycles.


>Most people won't buy a new console every three or four years.
>Only enthusiasts will. Most people will buy a new console when
>the old one stops playing the newest games, which should
>continue being every six years or so.

True. Except what we're seeing now is unprecedented in console world. Because there are tangible technological upgrades in 4k and VR. This isn't a Sega CD or N64 DD add on, this is a whole new base unit.


>If console makers try to force people to upgrade by making the
>old consoles obsolete earlier than normal, that will be hubris
>and the market will recede. So they won't.

You're misunderstanding my point. Like I said, these two consoles will coexist, not replace. It has nothing to do with making the older one obsolete.


>The only thing that's changing is enthusiast suckers get to
>throw more money at slightly better boxes. Which isn't a new
>phenomenon at all. It's been happening since the Famicom with
>varying results.

Name one console generation when there was a legitimate technical refresh mid-generation. It's never happened before.

http://www.recoregame.com/info/faq/

-30-
You know it's drama, but it sound real good.

you cover the problems pretty well below; its the solution to a problem that didn't really exist.

Cellphone upgrades, just like console upgrades, entice with new bells and whistles besides simply more processing power. 3D touch, waterpoof, etc. Xbox had kinect, PS4 has streamlined/updated community aspects, both controllers are lightyears better then last gen.

Im going to guess with this new model its strictly going to be about processing upgades since they dont want to split the username So you're stuck in a scenario where it's $300 bucks to have your games look better, but not THAT much better, lol


>the PS Neo does, they just look a little less impressive, and
>there's not a subsidy plan for either of these consoles so the
>upgrades are costing $300-$500 rather than what this model is
>being compared to, phones, which regularly cost less than $100
>thanks to wireless carrier contracts...does ANYONE want to
>spend that much money on their video game console every few
>years? I understand PC gamers do, but console gamers are not
>used to that, oftentimes buy into consoles specifically to
>dodge that bullet.
>

Rock that for multiplats and have the PS4 for exclusives since the games will keep playing on that for the foreseeable future.

I KNEW IT WOULD HAPPEN.

Am I the only person pissed off at the Xbox S? Now word comes that developers can choose to only support the Xbox S over the One. I reserve the right to buy an Xbox S at 200 in a few years.

it's the exact same console.

-30-
You know it's drama, but it sound real good.

• Ghost Recon looks neat, especially if there's a lot of different ways missions can play out. I'm imagining a co op MGS V in some ways). But I hate those fake conversational demos Ubisoft does, and as a person that doesn't enjoy headset gaming demos it always leaves me wondering if I can even play this game the way I'd want to. It sure sucked on GTA Online.

• The Division is The Division. I made my blood pact with Destiny and when I burned out on that and uninstalled it from my hard drive I knew it'd be a while before I got sucked into something like that again.

• VR bird game looked neat but the only way I'm getting VR anytime soon is if something on PSVR blows me away, and that wouldn't be it (neither would anything on PC VR sets).

• For Honor looks like a game. Seemed like player character takes a lot more damage than enemies, likely some kind of god/easy mode for a demo though. Hard to judge how long its legs are.

• Stoked for another South Park game, last one was a lot of fun and pretty clever. Nice of them to offer it as a pre-order bonus, it's pretty short and I only played it once so I wouldn't mind trying another class.

• Grow Home was cute but it didn't grab me. Skeptical they can stretch (:win that game to a full length product.

• Didn't buy any DLC so I'm about ready for more Trials. Until the super fucking hard end game levels anyway. Might just grab that to play between Ubisoft and PS4 unless it's too expensive.

• Watch_Dogs 2 is going to rely entirely on its characters because there was something weird about the first game that had me liking something about most of it while simultaneously hating nearly everything about it. So far, it seems like it's leaning in the right direction from the first while continuing to fuck THAT up in all the ways the original did.

• Which is why I'll be so disappointed in myself when I end up buying it anyway, just to see for myself.

• Assassin's Creed movie looks whatever, can't imagine Watch_Dogs will turn itself into a good movie unless they stumble into a great screenwriter.

• Steep seems like a game that will likely go very badly. The snowboarding looked rough, the skiing in first person looked kind of cool, I don't see the point in the other two sports being featured prominently.

• Kind of a rough conference. Super long, lot of stuff I have so-so opinions of. Ubisoft has found a lot of success doing this thing they do, though, so maybe I'm just wrong since I really don't play any of their games anyway. I might just not be the guy they're talking to.




~~~~~~~~~
"This is the streets, and I am the trap." � Jay Bilas
http://www.popmatters.com/pm/archive/contributor/517
Hip Hop Handbook: http://tinyurl.com/ll4kzz

of showing off games that have the potential to be fucking amazing, but will ultimately disappoint and be mediocre.

Watch Dogs 2, Ghost Recon, Steep, and For Honor all look great, but I don't trust any of them games to deliver when they launch. I've been burned too many times, AssCreed.

The eagle and Star Trek games look fun in short bursts, but who is going to have all them friends with VR sets? Kids are too broke and adults ain't got time for that bullshit. Neither game is about to move headsets off the shelves.

I'll prolly cop that Blood Dragon Trials and them South Park RPGs, tho.

-30-
You know it's drama, but it sound real good.

• The orchestra and steady stream of trailers with no superfluous commentary is a supremely ballsy idea

• What are they doing to God of War? I'm very intrigued. Looked very Naughty Dog mixed with combat like Bloodborne/The Witcher

• Horizon: Zero Dawn likely wins this whole show without issue

• Detroit looked cool, but it's David Cage. It's probably terrible.

• Batman VR Experience had a good monologue for a trailer, and this stuff looks really good compared to a lot of VR clips I've seen, but it's hard to tell what is happening and what isn't.

• Like, what's up with Resident Evil VII? It's either amazing or scary that that game got a first person walkthrough of a house as an introduction to Playstation's VR segment. Either that or it isn't really Resident Evil SEVEN.

• Infinite Warfare may be the first Call of Duty I play since Modern Warfare. That looked fucking cool. PLUS it comes with that game if you pre-order, and I remember enjoying that campaign a lot as well. I'm intrigued.

• Cool how they used Uncharted 4 to sneak announce remasters of the Crash Bandicoot Trilogy, weird how that's a big announcement (but also not)...

• LEGO Star Wars. K.

• Kojima game begs a lot of questions be asked. We'll see.

• Spider-Man looked dope but, again, we'll see. It's been awhile since anyone got close to nailing him in video games. Shame they didn't just take the suit from Marvel; maybe that's part of their new contract.

• Not sure about Days Gone. Looks really cool in several ways, but what are the mechanics? What's the context?

• Maybe I'm in the minority but I really enjoyed that thing as a consumer. The orchestra, the sequence of trailers with little commentary, few pitches, primarily just Sony's best stage speaker speaking every once in a while. I dug that a lot. Again, maybe I'm wrong.


~~~~~~~~~
"This is the streets, and I am the trap." � Jay Bilas
http://www.popmatters.com/pm/archive/contributor/517
Hip Hop Handbook: http://tinyurl.com/ll4kzz

>• Not sure about Days Gone. Looks really cool in several
>ways, but what are the mechanics? What's the context?

you shoot hella zombies.

-30-
You know it's drama, but it sound real good.

And was the stuff he was interacting with scripted or part of the game? Did those zombies push through things and fall through things because that was what they were designed to do or because those things were designed to have that happen to them?

What I mean is, in general, what was happening there? Was the weight of the zombie swarm factoring into their interactions with the environment? If so, awesome. If their breakthroughs and falls were scripted, does that mean the player closing doors and slamming barriers down were scripted too? Could he have taken a different path through that environment, or are they telling a linear story there?

Partially because they were letting the games speak for themselves all night, I'm leaning toward the former concept; those zombies are essentially bodies of water, and when enough of the swarm amasses on certain objects that mass forces them to give way. But then the moment I expected that theory to be proven, when the player ran across a bunch of loose-looking sheet metal and through a window outside, we never saw the zombie swarm fall through that sheet metal; instead, he blew them up with a molotov and red barrel.

As you can tell a lot of my curiosity stems from what I THINK that game is doing, because what I THINK that game is doing could be pretty fucking cool. But if it's all set pieces, everything I saw there begs comparisons to games that do it better. I can't imagine this game matching Last of Us narratively or atmospherically nor can I imagine it allowing for the creativity of Dead Rising in the gameplay based on what they showed.

~~~~~~~~~
"This is the streets, and I am the trap." � Jay Bilas
http://www.popmatters.com/pm/archive/contributor/517
Hip Hop Handbook: http://tinyurl.com/ll4kzz

maybe it was linear. It looked like an (at least partially) open world, with the motorcycle and shit.

I don't see it being nearly as moving as the Last of Us or as much of a playground as Dead Rising, but it looked tense as hell.

-30-
You know it's drama, but it sound real good.

to hunt hoards of zombies, at least that's the impression Brad Shoemaker got from his demo today. He took a few different paths from the way the guy in the demo took but otherwise played the same environment, there are prompts at certain spots to create obstacles or destruction elements that distract or kill zombies, but apparently the whole point might just be to go to a point and kill everything in sight?

pretty bummed if I'm proven wrong on my enemy mass theory, that was the only way I could've figured being interested in that game.

~~~~~~~~~
"This is the streets, and I am the trap." � Jay Bilas
http://www.popmatters.com/pm/archive/contributor/517
Hip Hop Handbook: http://tinyurl.com/ll4kzz

https://youtu.be/aH5bFYBEHeo

-30-
You know it's drama, but it sound real good.

>• Maybe I'm in the minority but I really enjoyed that thing
>as a consumer. The orchestra, the sequence of trailers with
>little commentary, few pitches, primarily just Sony's best
>stage speaker speaking every once in a while. I dug that a
>lot. Again, maybe I'm wrong.


As a person who doesnt own a PS4 but looking to get one (my kids have taken over my XB1), I wanted to know A LOT more about what I was watching. If I have to google what I just saw, fuck it!, SONY you lost a sale (for now). What frustrated me the most, after most of the big trailers they would zoom out to the audience but put more info on screen in small print. The audience would cheer or laugh leaving me with no clue of what they just read on screen.

Everything looked great, but what was it? I only identified 3 games.... that I was never a fan of in the first place.

___________________________________
http://instagram.com/mrellsberry

>• What are they doing to God of War? I'm very intrigued.
>Looked very Naughty Dog mixed with combat like Bloodborne/The
>Witcher

Yup. Wouldn't have guessed I'd be hype for a God of War game in 2016 but here we are.

>• Horizon: Zero Dawn likely wins this whole show without
>issue

Yeah, this looked amazing.

>• Detroit looked cool, but it's David Cage. It's probably
>terrible.

I liked Heavy Rain a lot; it was one of the more memorable games that gen. I'm down to check this one out.

>• Batman VR Experience had a good monologue for a trailer,
>and this stuff looks really good compared to a lot of VR clips
>I've seen, but it's hard to tell what is happening and what
>isn't.
>
>• Like, what's up with Resident Evil VII? It's either
>amazing or scary that that game got a first person walkthrough
>of a house as an introduction to Playstation's VR segment.
>Either that or it isn't really Resident Evil SEVEN.

None of the VR stuff looked interesting to me.

>• Infinite Warfare may be the first Call of Duty I play
>since Modern Warfare. That looked fucking cool. PLUS it comes
>with that game if you pre-order, and I remember enjoying that
>campaign a lot as well. I'm intrigued.

The ship combat stuff looks pretty cool and I was hoping it was a new Colony Wars game. Don't care about this franchise at all.

>• Cool how they used Uncharted 4 to sneak announce remasters
>of the Crash Bandicoot Trilogy, weird how that's a big
>announcement (but also not)...

Crash fans are the weirdest fans. That said, remastered 2 and 3 would be cool. Those were solid games.

>• LEGO Star Wars. K.
>
>• Kojima game begs a lot of questions be asked. We'll see.
>
>• Spider-Man looked dope but, again, we'll see. It's been
>awhile since anyone got close to nailing him in video games.
>Shame they didn't just take the suit from Marvel; maybe that's
>part of their new contract.

It's from the Sunset Overdrive guys. People liked that game so I would think this would at least be solid.

>• Not sure about Days Gone. Looks really cool in several
>ways, but what are the mechanics? What's the context?

I thought it looked okay until I saw the gameplay footage.

>• Maybe I'm in the minority but I really enjoyed that thing
>as a consumer. The orchestra, the sequence of trailers with
>little commentary, few pitches, primarily just Sony's best
>stage speaker speaking every once in a while. I dug that a
>lot. Again, maybe I'm wrong.

Yeah, they had a good showing. I thought MS did a good job as well, but there's probably slightly more I would want to play on Playstation.

And every damn game up to and including Resident EVIL looked insane.

Dat God of War. Dat Last Guardian actually being a game. Dat bootleg Last of Us 2/Dead Rising 5 (Days Gone). Dat Horizon. Dat Detroit. Dat Spider-Man with the ugly ass costume. Whatever that Kojima ass Kojima shit is. All of that looked ill. Almost none of that shit is coming out for years.

I'm still not sold on VR games being game ass games, but whatever.

There's hella games that I figured was gonna take up hella time but they just shoved all them joints into a montage at the end.

Sony ethered.

-30-
You know it's drama, but it sound real good.

>Dat Last Guardian actually being a game.

at some point just for this.

--------

it's cool to like being sold a dream, but that doesn't change what it is.

www.engadgethd.com - the other stuff i'm looking at

-30-
You know it's drama, but it sound real good.

FFXV too, both were announced like a decade ago?

Hope we'll get some NX news from Nintendo tomorrow.

-
Gang Starr / Nujabes blend - https://youtu.be/lsci1vu6ick
DOOM Tribute - https://youtu.be/qmBQ2BDefKM
Donut of the Heart cover in Javascript - https://youtu.be/afLc2CkC8lk

I really don't want to have to keep buying their shitty systems to play their awesome games.

They'd make a console that's on par or more powerful than what we have now. That way you'd get Nintendo exclusives and 3rd party games that would look amazing still on a Nintendo system.

Maybe they'll do that with the NX, but who knows. People have shown recently that they'll spend money on a power house. Their choice of doing things is so odd.

=================
Official Okay-Super Villain™

I only play the games that I win at -
Gamertag: Innovator
PSN: DurtyGambino
Steam: Durty Gambino
Twitch.tv/durtygambino

let alone the 4.5/Scorpio.

I'm just hoping they don't have an expensive gimmick that sticks them with a high price throughout the system's life like what they did with the Wii U and tablet. It's crazy to me that the system still costs $300 when something like the Xbox One S is the same price.

>They'd make a console that's on par or more powerful than
>what we have now. That way you'd get Nintendo exclusives and
>3rd party games that would look amazing still on a Nintendo
>system.

But if you say it to some Nintendo fans they be like, "Nah, Nintendo has to innovate and push the industry forward."

Innovate don't mean reinventing the damn wheel each time out, tho. Stop with the gimmicky ass control schemes, make a machine as powerful as the competition, court 3rd parties, and keep making dope 1st party games. That's all they need to do, but they refuse.

-30-
You know it's drama, but it sound real good.

just make the system powerful so people wanna develop for it

-30-
You know it's drama, but it sound real good.

God Of War, Horizon, Call of Duty YES!
That resident evil trailer was creepy as fuck I'm very interested.

http://soundcloud.com/djshinobishaw
http://www.rareformnyc.com
http://twitter.com/DJShinobiShaw
https://twitter.com/RareFormNYC
PSN: ShinobiShaw

"Arm Leg Leg Arm How you doin?" (c)T510

disclaimer: i haven't seen ubi or ea conferences. also nearly everything being shown is kind of mind-blowing from a presentation perspective. i'm very happy that the devs are starting to pull more and more out of these consoles. all these games are visually very impressive. that said, i'd be surprised if anything shown will look as good on current console iterations

my impression of most of the games being shown is that a great number of them are very derivative and/or iterative. i understand that's the nature of the games business but seeing something like days gone is disconcerting. i thought the industry had already thoroughly strip-mined post-apocalyptic zombie-ridden environments


my thoughts so far:

forza horizon 3 looks great. i love MS leaning into windows 10 gaming. give me 4k forza horizon 3 and i'll be very happy

horizon: zero dawn might be good. the setting is intriguing. my heart sank a little when i saw all those materials on the enemy HUD. are we not over crafting yet? the game makes me think of the witcher. i don't know if that's good or bad

i'm not seeing what everyone else seems to be seeing in god of war. it looks like dark souls lite stuffed with cinematic gameplay events. yuck. but i can see how that kind of game would appeal to people. maybe it will be really good

final fantasy XV trailers/gameplay continue to be a mixed bag. i can't tell what that game is supposed to be

scalebound looks awful. very disappointing. could just be that gameplay segment though

dead rising 3 put me off the series for good and 4 seems to be more of 3. hard pass

Tripwire Interactive - Killing Floor 2

https://www.playstation.com/en-us/games/killing-floor-2-ps4/

Shout out to John G over at Tripwire out in Roswell, GA.

___________________________________
http://instagram.com/mrellsberry

Furious Styles: https://blacknative.bandcamp.com/album/furious-styles

Black Confederate on iTunes:
https://itunes.apple.com/us/album/black-confederate-single/id940282326

Video to Black Confederate: http://youtu.be/jbpAQ4qzkqY

PSN: WakandanKing
Follow

https://youtu.be/HtNgD4JuQ-E

-30-
You know it's drama, but it sound real good.

Furious Styles: https://blacknative.bandcamp.com/album/furious-styles

Black Confederate on iTunes:
https://itunes.apple.com/us/album/black-confederate-single/id940282326

Video to Black Confederate: http://youtu.be/jbpAQ4qzkqY

PSN: WakandanKing
Follow

https://youtu.be/Kzb2ZNam5O8

Reminds me of dark souls but martial arts

is going this gen.

Games have been running the Arkham style into the ground. The Souls series got devs experimenting again.

-30-
You know it's drama, but it sound real good.