New Xbox revealed!

[Troncoso]

I completely disagree. Consoles nowadays are not just for gaming, either. A PC can game just as good as a console and better, and the flaws it does have are not because a PC isn't made for gaming.

Consoles are designed and built for gaming. That is there purpose. Just because they can do more, doesn't make that not true. And they will always be better for gaming in the long run because their hardware and OS is designed to give the most resources to games, and because devs will always prefer to build games for consoles where they know the exact hardware their games will run on.

As much as I'd love to just have all my games on PC and game only on PC, I know it won't happen. And because I can accept that, I gladly buy into these consoles to play amazing games that will never see their way to PC outside an emulator.

 

[PCunicorn]

I know, and I play Uncharted and The Last Of Us. But, I still way perfer the PC for gaming. Even though it's not "made" for it. And you could get a 4870 5 years ago and not need to upgrade.

 

[jonnyp11]

That's true for high end PCs, the cost of a console isn't as big as a good up to date gaming PC.

Console nowadays are either for gaming or for multimedia playing. They shouldn't become like PCs, we already have those.

Mine was built for around 5 or 600 a year and a half ago and is better than the one but a little behind the ps4. And you dont have to upgrade to play the newest games, the only reason the 360 and ps3 lasted was they were on 720p and they had games designed for their hardware so it could still look okay. A decent computer from 7 years ago would do the same pretty much, just low res and low settings

 

[Troncoso]

Mine was built for around 5 or 600 a year and a half ago and is better than the one but a little behind the ps4. And you dont have to upgrade to play the newest games, the only reason the 360 and ps3 lasted was they were on 720p and they had games designed for their hardware so it could still look okay. A decent computer from 7 years ago would do the same pretty much, just low res and low settings

So, considering that the PS3 and 360 are 7 years old now, you are saying that a decent computer built around the same time could handle the same games only on low resolutions and settings, were as those consoles could handle them at 720p.

Not to try and sway the conversation one way or another, but, that logic seems extremely flawed.

 

[jonnyp11]

Meant 720p when i said low, my 19" at 1440*900 which is a higher res isnt very good really. Was saying a decent pc from then should still play anything the consoles can.

 

[PCunicorn]

@tronsoco No, but I say every 4 or so years. A GTX 260 was around $200 and still plays BF3 today. Really, a 8800 GTX still plays a lot of games on low, and that isn't to much above the PS3, and is only a year newer.

 

[Darren]

As much of a PC fanboy as I am, PC games on low is not the same as console quality, especially in newer titles.

I love playing my PC but saying that a computer built 7 years ago can run games as well and look as good as a PS3 or 360 is a lie. That's not gonna happen. PC elitism can get pretty annoying after a while, even if it sometimes is founded in truth.

 

[PCunicorn]

Right now? Yes. PS3=PC on low. BF3 is a great example.

 

[jonnyp11]

Yeah the problem is they develop the games specifically for the consoles. For example, consoles are dx9, but on the pc, BF3 requires dx10+. And in some cases, they turn physics and stuff down or off more than you can in the settings

 

[Okedokey]

...Even when faced with truth they still seem to stand strong and disbelieve everything else other than their own findings.

http://www.dailygame.net/features/ps4-pre-orders-dropping-hard-at-amazon-except-one

 

[Punk]

@tronsoco No, but I say every 4 or so years. A GTX 260 was around $200 and still plays BF3 today. Really, a 8800 GTX still plays a lot of games on low, and that isn't to much above the PS3, and is only a year newer.

Games on low isn't what I call gaming, it's exactly what I've been saying, you need to upgrade components to have the same experience as on the consoles.

http://www.dailygame.net/features/ps4-pre-orders-dropping-hard-at-amazon-except-one

Like people have been saying, this is only about Amazon.

 

[Okedokey]

Games on low isn't what I call gaming, it's exactly what I've been saying, you need to upgrade components to have the same experience as on the consoles.



Like people have been saying, this is only about Amazon.

Amazon is the one of the biggest retailers in the world and the only information we have so until then its the best information we have.

 

[Punk]

Amazon is the one of the biggest retailers in the world and the only information we have so until then its the best information we have.

I'm not going to take any sides here but it's just ONE of the biggest retailers. Although I do trust Hyper more than you because I've known her on CF for a very long time, I'm not going to take part in this arguing. All I'm going to say is consoles are made for gaming and PC aren't made only for gaming, hence the flaws and the price of having an up to date gaming PC.

 

[Okedokey]

I'm not going to take any sides here but it's just ONE of the biggest retailers. Although I do trust Hyper more than you because I've known her on CF for a very long time, I'm not going to take part in this arguing. All I'm going to say is consoles are made for gaming and PC aren't made only for gaming, hence the flaws and the price of having an up to date gaming PC.

No one is asking you too. And your personal trust doesn't have anything to do with it. Its not about trust or anything personal at all.

Its about evidence. And to date the most up to date evidence available is what is provided. And that says that xbox is selling stronger. It certainly doesn't support her 3:1 ration for the PS4. Which is the whole point.

Bringing it down to 'trust' and length of time is simply silly. So far the only evidence provided that shows sales of one or the other (btw I couldn't care) is the Amazon numbers. Much larger and more representative than any shop your friend works at, and to date the only information we have. Also the idea that because its only Amazon is a red herring. For that hypothesis to hold true, you have to show something that would indicate that only a particular (therefore stratified) sample of the population will buy there. I say its random and therefore representative of any other site. But until then, anything (without evidence) to the contrary is simply conjecture as I said before.

Nothing against anyone personally.

 

[Punk]

I think this is important:

The Xbox One currently has the top spot on Amazon’s pre-order list, with various PlayStation 4 SKUs holding multiple spots in the top ten. This is partially due to the aforementioned rush during E3, but also to PS4 bundles being available whereas Microsoft has only made available the console itself (the Xbox One Day One edition). With news of Xbox One quantities being so limited at launch, there’s now an increased urgency to pre-order the Xbox One if you’re hoping to get at release-day unit. The easiest way to do so is to place your Xbox One pre-order at Amazon.

http://www.dailygame.net/videogames...nch-inventory-to-be-far-greater-than-xbox-one

I wished we had those spot numbers but if Sony has for example spot 2 and 3, it could easily outnumber Xbox One.

But again, this is only on Amazon...

 

[Okedokey]

Again conjecture, could, might, may be, we don't know. I dont see anything that changes the situation. And seriously... sayings its only Amazon, makes no sense. Its a random statistically significant sample. Much better than any other data we have to date. So unless you have a verified reason as to why Amazon data is invalid, then, please stop.

What we do know is that based on Amazon figures, xbox is leading. Fact.

 

[Troncoso]

If you do a little digging into the Amazon top-sellers, you see that the XBox One above PS4 is the "Day One Edition". That's the one that ships to you the day its released. They are still available for order. Sure you can consider that PS4 has bundles still up for pre-order, but xbox doesn't (from what I can tell on Amazon, as that is the only site you seem to trust) so, it's not really fair to consider anything other than the basic launch versions of each console.

PS4 launch edition is sold out, so how can they continue to be ordered to even keep its placed in best-seller?

Now we consider the standard edition of both consoles. The standard edition of the PS4 is in the top 10, where the standard edition XBox One doesn't even make it onto the top 100.

PS4 held the top spot until they sold out of launch versions. Of course the pre-orders would "sharply decline". There are no more to pre-order.

You are blindly posting articles to try and prove your point, when (considering this is the Internet) the information from those authors can easily be stretched, skewed, manipulated, what have you.

I did my own research, and from what I see, the number of pre-orders is simply an inventory issue. Then we looked at the standard edition to see that the PS4 is still in fact being ordered and is vastly ahead of the XBox one standard edition.

Finally, the PS4 launch edition has sold out whereas the XBox One launch edition has not. What does that say? Consider the article Punk posted from the same website as your article saying that there were more PS4 systems for order than XBox one.

A source:
http://www.amazon.com/best-sellers-...=ATVPDKIKX0DER&pf_rd_r=00ZR4RYVEA88P6Y0VCK5#1

It is updated hourly, so my information is accurate as of 6/29/2013 11:14 AM EST.

 

[PCunicorn]

Games on low isn't what I call gaming, it's exactly what I've been saying, you need to upgrade components to have the same experience as on the consoles.



Like people have been saying, this is only about Amazon.

I was saying BF3 on consoles looks like low on PC. Brink was the same way, and those are just the games I have played on the PC and PS3. And that is the craziest comment on the thread, "gaming on low isn't what I would all gaming", then how are gaming consoles still referred to GAMING consoles, even though they play games on what would be low on PC. Until the PS4 and Xbox One are out, current consoles are very outdated.

 

[Punk]

I was saying BF3 on consoles looks like low on PC. Brink was the same way, and those are just the games I have played on the PC and PS3. And that is the craziest comment on the thread, "gaming on low isn't what I would all gaming", then how are gaming consoles still referred to GAMING consoles, even though they play games on what would be low on PC. Until the PS4 and Xbox One are out, current consoles are very outdated.

You either don't want to see what I wanted to say (be it right or wrong) or you're not thinking while reading...

How can you say you have the same experience when playing at High Res than at Low res? Please come and play on my computer, you'll see what I mean, because PS3 and Xbox360 are still better than my PC. So once again, unless you spent a lot of money on a good gaming PC (which is MORE than for a console) your PC won't give you the same gaming experience as consoles.

 

[PCunicorn]

I spent roughly $350 on my PS3. I spent roughly $500 on my old PC. Which played games in higher settings? The $500 PC. Yes, its $150 more. But, i spent less then $100 on game
s for my PC and have better and more games then the PS3 with $200 on games. And, what are you talking about wuth res? The average PC gamers res is 1080p, and thats the same with a console.
Look at this: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ocVyrtcTpHw