E3 2016 Discussion

[Kriven]

I'm already pretty invested in the XBLA ecosystem after being in there for ten years, and then Microsoft went and announced backwards compatibility last year and Sony did not, so it made a lot of sense to continue being involved with Microsoft for multiplats and whatever exclusives of theirs that I will like. I also generally prefer their service to what Sony is doing.

At some point I'll grab a PS4, but probably not until the generation is almost over. I only just got a PS3, and that was so I could go in and grab all the exclusives I missed out on now that they're cheap. I'll just have to repeat at the end of this generation.

[miyabi95_]

The 360 was a good system. But yeah, the Xbox One kind of fucked up before it was even out. Apart from people who just refuse to change platform I don't understand. Last gen there was no clear difference between the 2 really, but this gen the PS4 is the clear better system.

as we discussed in the N64/PSX/Saturn thread, today's gaming consoles have their own pros and cons. I personally would own a PS4 just so I could play more fighting games and indie games, but at the same time I would have so much fun with Mario Kart 8, Sm4sh, Pokken and whatever other games they wanna make for the Wii-U. I'm pretty indifferent with the XBone though. The original Xbox is amazing though. I'd play Capcom vs. SNK 2 all day if I could.

This e3 didn't really spark my interests as much as others, besides KOF XIV and Zelda.

[Goemar]

I'm already pretty invested in the XBLA ecosystem after being in there for ten years, and then Microsoft went and announced backwards compatibility last year and Sony did not.

When my first old fat PS3 got stolen I was hell bent on making sure that the insurance people gave me the money (instead of replacing it with a new one) so I could buy another one in order to keep the PS2 backwards compatibility. Eventually the replacement one had a YLOD and I realised - I had pretty much never played a PS2 game on my PS3 anyway - and got the super-slim one (which is very nice and small, making it very handy). I can't say I really missed the backwards compatibility.

I never really trade in my consoles or get rid of them so backwards compatibility has never really bothered me. On handhelds it's nice for the sake of convenience but as for consoles, always seemed kinda pointless to me.

Except for the 360 being able to play Xbox games - because the old Xbox was the size of the universe.

[Kriven]

Back Compat matters to me a lot, as I cycle through different generations of gaming pretty frequently. I was very put out when my 360 Arcade finally red ringed and I bought a new 360 E (I think that's what it is...) only to discover that the newer ones couldn't play OG XBOX games.

Backwards compatibility means I only need oneish console to carry the weight of two. The only exceptions being where a games' optimal performance is related to what display it's on... so I've got my PS2 (and now my OG XBOX) hooked up to a big CRT with my Wii, so I don't worry so much if last gen's consoles can play those games. Since last generation's Sony and Microsoft consoles were built with the same progressive screens as the XBONE and PS4, though, I would prefer if the modern consoles could support BC.

Honestly, I'm hoping whoever makes those Retro Duo/Trio things will step into the modern era and give us a PS2/OG XBOX/GCN/Wii hybrid box so I don't need three boxes chilling out in the living room. I also wouldn't mind just not having new iterations of the PlayStation/XBOX for another ten years. At this point I don't really understand why we can't have a universal game format. I don't need to buy a Sony DVD Player to watch The Amazing Spider-Man, why do I need a Sony Video Game Player to play the upcoming Spider-Man game? I understand that consoles have different hardware and the games are tailored towards that, but maybe things should work the other way around... let the game developers basically make games for the PC (since consoles are essentially PCs at this point anyway) and have the console manufacturers fight to make the best pre-built PC "console." Highest specs, highest compatibility. Let the consumers decide it's time to upgrade only when the AAA games start to lag too much for them to handle.

[iyenal]

Today, the consoles are only PC who connects to a TV more easily.

Before, the consoles have some specialized chips for sprites and 3D support, that computers don't have and have only a "text mode", that made the difference, and their manufacturers do exclusive games (Nintendo, Sega and Hudson with PC Engine), but now the principal manufacturers (Microsoft and Sony) don't do games for their platforms, and the third party developers do crossplatform games.

Consoles now become meaningless (except for the manufacturers that allow them to sell objects with margin of 80%),the race to the highest frequency(CPU/GPU power) slow down, but the exclusive games can make all the difference ; and Nintendo only do exclusive games currently (but PC can run Wii U games with Cemu...).
The end of consoles approach at high speed; That's the issue of the E3, sell consoles and games.

[Goemar]

In a perfect world everything would play anything, but it will never happen, ever.

If you was to build a PC as powerful as a PS4 it would cost you more money, as consoles are subsidised a fair bit by the various companies involved.

Not only that but consoles play games a lot better than PCs, now hold up Mr rage with your mouse and keyboard and let me explain...

Doom works perfectly on the PS4. To do this id needs to get the game working perfectly on a PS4.

Doom looks and plays better on the PC. Some PCs. And not even the most powerful ones. Dual graphics cards seem to make it crash. It doesn't like certain things. For id to make Doom play perfectly on the PC - they can't. There's millions of variables. They can only make it play the best they can.

If you're a tech savvy guy, you can probably make it run like a dream. But for your average Joe, Doom simply doesn't run well for you and that's that.

Thus there will always be a huge market for consoles. And multiple consoles.

DVDs and Blu-Rays are not games. Games are fine tuned to get the most out of the hardware. Not only that but lets not forget that we nearly DID have 2 different HD movie formats. If HD-DVDs lived then you could very well have had 2 movie playing devices right now. It's only because the market (and big bags of money to make certain studios exclusive - aka Disney) decided against it.

The only way you'll get one console is if everyone buys that one console. But as strong exclusives exist (owned by the console makers) that will never happen. Ever. If there was no exclusives brand loyalty would probably keep it trucking for a while as well.

As long as their is money to be made, companies will choose money over convenience for the consumer. And I don't want to be in a world where the new game I brought may or may not play that great on my console/PC I just spent loads of money on. I just want it to work.

[AuraLancer]

Sorry, I should clarify - I was talking about grabbing the Xbone at launch. The backwards compatibility is a very strong point for Microsoft now, that and it helps that the systems aren't dropping like flies due to shoddy engineering like the 360s were for most of last gen. I watched my friend go through nine of them. NINE! Between that and then shoving ads all over the menus despite the online being a paid service is why I refused to touch the thing.