the ui would hopefully be different, but I’d guess the kernel and apis would stay relatively the same.
Next-gen software and services *spawn
- Thread starter anexanhume
- Start date
the ui would hopefully be different, but I’d guess the kernel and apis would stay relatively the same.
??
And MS are innocent? The company that inserted the wedge into free online gaming that is now becoming ridiculous? The company that made everyone who wanted to buy an XBO buy a ~$100 camera?
That's probably a bad idea. An old game will be stooped in legacy concepts that you'll want a next generation of games to not be hampered by. Say, using Uncharted's animation blending, that then gets used in a new PS5 title where, if the devs didn't start from their old material, maybe they'd have gone with some new ML based animation instead?
Yea but the discussion isn't about MS lol. nor is it about cameras or pay to play online. This is about enhanced backwards compatibility vs remasters.
MS have already moved forward with everything being backwards compatible with upgrades. That's the only reason Tot didn't bring them up on this topic.
That's a total misrepresentation. Online gaming was a mess before Xbox Live! MS unified it, simplified it, and created all the features now taken for granted as standard. Having good online service that work is worth more than zero, and these paid-for service even come with additional games, so it's not like the value is terrible.
People better becarefull naming anything that's not positive about Sony
The PS2 also didn't come with a HDD or a network adaptor not where i live atleast, those where both included in the first xbox. OG xbox was the first console with serious online gaming, thought it worked quite well for being the first time a console went online. You could even have friends list etc. The xbox had the better online by far.
The PS3's online was still free? Don't know between 360 and PS3 if any had advantages/disadvantages, totally missed that generation.
What are you two yammering about???
My comment was a general statement about a business (in this case Sony) being a business. A business that will choose what's best for their business. Nothing more, nothing less.
Stop being corporate cheerleaders.
I'm sorry, can you be more clear? Which one is the peepee poopoo one, sony or MS?
That's nothing. Try having an opinion about the xb1 pcb being "a mess". It won't even matter that you used to have a job routing pcbs.People better becarefull naming anything that's not positive about Sony
Tkumpathenurple
Veteran
I'm not sure it would be feasible to charge for straightforward improvements like rendering resolution, texture resolution, and framerate. Not after the groundwork Microsoft have laid this generation.
Anyone who owned an X360, and has done even so little as look into which current generation console to consider, is aware that the X1 will let them play a bunch of their old games. That's potentially ~80-90 million people - of course, second hand X360 sales may substantially increase that number, but I have no idea to what extent that would be offset by sales of people replacing broken consoles and upgrading to newer models.
Sony may get cocky and try to charge for minor upgrades with backwards compatibility, but they'd cost themselves a lot more than they'd gain by pissing away some of the huge swathes of X360 gamers they managed to pilfer this generation. Not all of them, but enough for it to be foolish to go the penny pinching route of charging a tenner for downloading a few replacement files.
Although I think something along the lines of the Shadow of the Colossus or FFVII remakes would be pretty saleable, there's only so much that Bluepoint can take on at once.
Anyone who owned an X360, and has done even so little as look into which current generation console to consider, is aware that the X1 will let them play a bunch of their old games. That's potentially ~80-90 million people - of course, second hand X360 sales may substantially increase that number, but I have no idea to what extent that would be offset by sales of people replacing broken consoles and upgrading to newer models.
Sony may get cocky and try to charge for minor upgrades with backwards compatibility, but they'd cost themselves a lot more than they'd gain by pissing away some of the huge swathes of X360 gamers they managed to pilfer this generation. Not all of them, but enough for it to be foolish to go the penny pinching route of charging a tenner for downloading a few replacement files.
Although I think something along the lines of the Shadow of the Colossus or FFVII remakes would be pretty saleable, there's only so much that Bluepoint can take on at once.
That's nothing. Try having an opinion about the xb1 pcb being "a mess". It won't even matter that you used to have a job routing pcbs.
Were you fired from that job?
No, the company went bankrupt because my pcbs were a mess.Were you fired from that job?
Silent_Buddha
Legend
Holy cow, the PR speak is STRONG in this one! I've never heard of gamers described as "sticky", although I guess that would fit for some of the gamers that play some of those...ummm...less well know...er...Japanese games.
Regards,
SB
I really don't see how they charge for remasters or whatever considering backwards compatibility is a thing next gen. In fact all there talk about getting people to transition quickly says to me they going to upgrade there own games for free.
I expect that all there most recent first party games will be advertised being 4k and 60fps on PS5.
I expect that all there most recent first party games will be advertised being 4k and 60fps on PS5.
I never had issues with online game before Xbox, nor did I have issues with PS3 online which was free. It was the thin end of the wedge that was charging for something that was previously free, now the big thing is Gamepass ultimate - then there's all the other options out there...I just don't like everything behind a subscription where you end up with multiple 'small amounts' that all add up.
It's not that, it's just the implication that Sony are evil and charge for everything but MS are this wonderful company that do everything for free...which company has (and makes) the most money?People better becarefull naming anything that's not positive about Sony
Let's not go down this road because the PS2 came out a while before Xbox and had the ability to upgrade, but that's well ahead of when HDD or online was more than a very niche area, even during the PS3/360 era online at the start it wasn't anywhere near as popular as it is today. And if you want to talk about including hardware at launch, let's talk about the Core which was essentially the biggest rip-off known to man. Or that with PS3 despite it being expensive it had everything you wanted and you could upgrade/add items that's were not proprietary, unlike the ultra-locked down 360 (£50 for a TV lead anyone?) And talking of TV leads, 360 didn't even had a HDMI socket at launch!
Why do you think MS had worked so hard on BC this gen? Why do you think MS added free games to Xbox Live? Why do you think MS backtracked on always online? Is it a) because they are so generous or b) because they needed to do something to stop the Titanic that was XBO? In a way we have Sony to thank for these things like we have MS to thank for the PS3 turn-around and PS4 being as good as it was.What are you two yammering about???
My comment was a general statement about a business (in this case Sony) being a business. A business that will choose what's best for their business. Nothing more, nothing less.
Stop being corporate cheerleaders.
What makes you think that next gen Sony would charge for something MS might be doing for free or visa versa? But yeah, "Sony is Sony".
Last edited:
PS3 online copied XBox so was okay, although it lacked party chat and the like. Every feature on PS4's robust service was pioneered on Live. Before that, network on PC was a nightmare of different logins and crap-shoots. Live unified all online gaming into a single interface, separating the online part form the game.
Yeah, if all you wanted to do was play online, Live was unnecessary. If you wanted to connect with other players online, and be able to see what theyr'e up to, and join their games, and chat across games and apps, etc. Live and the other services are necessary. If they aren't your cup of tea and you'd be happy to just log into games with a different sign-in every time and use Skype on your phone the same time you feel like chatting to someone across games or whatever, fine, Live isn't great value for you. But otherwise, these services aren't at all bad value, and that's coming from a complete cheapskate who barely uses them!
Nobody said or even implied that. It was just raised about how Sony might go about doing business. Motives and virtues are irrelevant and none are 'good'.
Last edited:
D
Deleted member 11852
Guest
I've never heard of gamers described as "sticky", although I guess that would fit for some of the gamers that play some of those...ummm...less well know...er...Japanese games.
Yeah, 'sticky' is replacing 'loyal' in PR speak. I don't think it's better but the rationale is that 'loyalty' is often associated with subservience. Like a dog.
D
Deleted member 13524
Guest
Party chat was enabled in Steam in 2007, and Steam Cloud Saving appeared the year after that. And it has always been free.
I get that Xbox Live was a pioneer of online services for consoles, but let's not get ahead of ourselves by calling the contemporaneous PC solutions a nightmare.
Xbox Live introduced universal chat in 2002. If you wanted chat that was guaranteed to work, you paid the $50 a year fee.
As for PC, I can only talk from my experiences, and where I tried online a few times on PC, it was a nightmare. It wasn't at all robust and trying to coordinate three people, some evenings we never got to play anything. If you wanted to play a game, you had to create an account. Then host a game. Then the others would have to find it. You'd try chat in game and it might work, might not, so then you'd try multitasking Skype in the background.
"Can you see my game?"
"No."
"Okay. I'll log off and you try."
"Right. This is my server and the password is BOB."
"Found it. Connecting. Connecting. Yeah, I'm on."
"Where's Richard?"
"It just keeps dropping me out whenever I connect."
"Okay, let's try Richard hosting."
etc.
That was also true of PS3 on occasions such as Borderland's chat being screwed up in game and never being fixed, and no background-chat mode on PS3 to use that service instead. PS4 is the first console I've owned where online is robust and seamless. For £40 a year, including a couple dozen games, to not have to deal with those online headaches, it's worth it.