By using this site, you agree to our Privacy Policy and our Terms of Use. Close

Forums - Gaming Discussion - Let's stop kidding ourselves.

DevilRising on 11 November 2013
DarthFrinker said:
Playstation 4 is going to have the superior 1st party Exclusives. I'm sorry but Fable has gradually went downhill to absolute manure. Halo is still great but a former shell of what it once was with Bungie. Rare and its IP's have been well and truly raped and buried. Microsoft yet again will prove they have a lackluster array of 1st party games.


I would agree with you that PS4 will more than likely get the better 1st party exclusives over XB1, though that is a matter of personal taste ultimately. However, speaking of personal taste, I would also argue that Wii U will have the "superior" 1st party exclusives over both.

Mario, Mario Kart, Smash Bros., Bayonetta 2, X, SMT x Fire Emblem, Zelda, the possibility of future titles like Star Fox, Wave Race, F-Zero, Metroid, etc. plus the possibility of other second/third party exclusives, or other new IPs from Nintendo. I think they'll at least be "on par", in many fans eyes, with Sony.



Around the Network
Mr Khan on 11 November 2013
Frequency said:
DevilRising said:


That's funny, you don't need to pay extra $$$ to play a lot of games online with Steam. You also didn't need to do so with PSN on PS3, which was most certainly a "network infrastructure" as you call it. The argument really doesn't hold water, and Sony seemed to be doing just fine having free online last gen. And while Nintendo may not an XBL type of system, the Wii U has it's friend structure and new Miiverse functions, the latter of which I'm sure costs at least some money to operate. However, even if Nintendo DID have a more elaborate "network infrastructure", I think they just might not charge people for online gaming, because no matter how people like you try to rationalize it because "your company", IE the company you're obviously a fan of, is doing it, it's still a fucking ripoff.

No, network costs don't "come on the disk you buy", but the online modes that the developer programmed into the fucking game sure as hell do. And getting bent over and told to take it is getting bent over and told to take it, no matter how you try to justfy it, it is what it is. And that is precisely what paying $70 for a PS4 game, and then having to pay a manditory monthy PSN fee JUST to play that game online, is.

Most steam games are peer to peer, with some using content servers or dedicated servers, but we are talking consoles here.

Mr Khan said:

Yeah, if Sony or Microsoft were actually running a network structure and not a peer-to-peer one. There's nothing they're doing that Nintendo's not doing. You're paying *them* to use *your* online to play with others. Sounds like slavery to me.

Both Microsoft and Sony are running coherant connectable network infrastructures ranging from content management to profile storage / cloud storage and for games that warrant it, dedicated login or game servers, Nintendos approach is simply to issue friend codes and bounce you to the person you want to play with via relay, Nintendo has no tangible accounts system, when connected to the internet you are just a hardware id, thus if you switch machines for any reason you start over.

Saying the two are the same shows a complete lack of any workable knowledge of the network systems in place.

Still fail to see the difference. If *all* games had dedicated servers, it would be worth it. If we're talking about content management, that's all stuff that's being monetized by, you know, buying the content. The rest is just a peer-to-peer run that they've duped gamers into paying for.



Monster Hunter: pissing me off since 2010.

POE on 11 November 2013



orniletter on 11 November 2013

I apparently haven´t really played Mario Kart 7 online for free...because hardware id- whatsitsname.

And Miiverse doesn´t exist........seemingly



goppzstore on 11 November 2013

Spam replaced by Dixie Kong



Around the Network
DonFerrari on 11 November 2013
S.T.A.G.E. said:
DonFerrari said:
DevilRising said:
Frequency said:
 

A network infrastructure and its 24/7 operational costs are not on the disk you buy.

Also, Nintendo would need a network infrastructure to begin with, to charge.


That's funny, you don't need to pay extra $$$ to play a lot of games online with Steam. You also didn't need to do so with PSN on PS3, which was most certainly a "network infrastructure" as you call it. The argument really doesn't hold water, and Sony seemed to be doing just fine having free online last gen. And while Nintendo may not an XBL type of system, the Wii U has it's friend structure and new Miiverse functions, the latter of which I'm sure costs at least some money to operate. However, even if Nintendo DID have a more elaborate "network infrastructure", I think they just might not charge people for online gaming, because no matter how people like you try to rationalize it because "your company", IE the company you're obviously a fan of, is doing it, it's still a fucking ripoff.

No, network costs don't "come on the disk you buy", but the online modes that the developer programmed into the fucking game sure as hell do. And getting bent over and told to take it is getting bent over and told to take it, no matter how you try to justfy it, it is what it is. And that is precisely what paying $70 for a PS4 game, and then having to pay a manditory monthy PSN fee JUST to play that game online, is.

I do hope Ninty doesn't get greedy as MS and Sony and keep the online free... maybe that put PSN normal as okay to use for MP (even tough I don't use it...) keep PS+ just for the special content that are great...


Theres no real demand on Nintendo products for them to do it. If Nintendo makes their games even more online friendly  the demand will come. Nintendo has conditioned Nintendo gamers to play on the couch with the family rather than to play online. They would have to reverse a thirty year old process they've basically perfected. That and they need to fix their issues with third parties in a major way so those top third party online games can be on the Wii U.

I preffer an always offline console =[  ... but if PS4 don't mandate me to play online I'm satisfied.



duduspace11 "Well, since we are estimating costs, Pokemon Red/Blue did cost Nintendo about $50m to make back in 1996"

http://gamrconnect.vgchartz.com/post.php?id=8808363

Mr Puggsly: "Hehe, I said good profit. You said big profit. Frankly, not losing money is what I meant by good. Don't get hung up on semantics"

http://gamrconnect.vgchartz.com/post.php?id=9008994

Azzanation: "PS5 wouldn't sold out at launch without scalpers."

gergroy on 11 November 2013
Frequency said:

Okay, lets just get it out and settle it once and for all.

PlayStation 4 is going to sell the best this generation.
PlayStation 4 is the most powerful games console this generation.
Multi-plat titles are more often than not going to be better on PlayStation 4 this generation.
For TV and programming services, Xbox One will be best this generation.
Xbox One is going to easilly beat the WiiU this generation.
WiiU sales will improve but never enough to reach over 60M lifetime.
Resolution and framerate stability is going to more often than not be better on PlayStation 4.
There are, and are going to be, great games on all three systems, enough of them, and of a quality that warrant the purchase of each machine.
Online services and multiplayer for both Xbox One and PlayStation 4 are well worth the fees associated with them.
PC versions of multiplatform games are going to see a big boost in quality because of the new consoles.
As gamers, with all three consoles and PC getting better games in the future, we ALL win, regardless.

Once we accept this and move on to actually PLAYING the games, these forums are just doing to be a dire state of petty arguments, none of which benefit the community, or change the situation with the consoles in any way.


While i agree with pretty much everything here.  There are some things, especially the first line, that really shouldnt be accepted.  I agree the ps4 is likely to sell the most this gen, but if we have learned anything from this generation, it is that you cant predict how a console is going to sell throughout its lifetime.  



Frequency on 11 November 2013
orniletter said:
I apparently haven´t really played Mario Kart 7 online for free...because hardware id- whatsitsname.

And Miiverse doesn´t exist........seemingly

Your hardware ID was bounced to other hardware ids and the player with the lowest ping automatically set to host, which everyone else in the game is then connected to, the same goes for miiverse.

The only tangible service nintendo offers/offered is storage for sending drawn images to other users, and even then these are tiny monochrome files that are shunted off the server eventually.

The day you can buy a new console, login with a nintendo account and access all of your saves, purchases and profile data, is the day they will be providing a tangible coherant service network, until then youre just a hardware id being bounced around.

 

Mr Khan said:

Still fail to see the difference. If *all* games had dedicated servers, it would be worth it. If we're talking about content management, that's all stuff that's being monetized by, you know, buying the content. The rest is just a peer-to-peer run that they've duped gamers into paying for.

I suppose the difference is I have worked on games for Wii, WiiU, PS3 and 360 so I have an in depth knowledge of the network environments, so whether or not you fail to see a difference does not change the fact that there is one.



outlawauron on 11 November 2013

This forum has brings some interesting perspectives that I would never hear if I stayed off international forums.



"We'll toss the dice however they fall,
And snuggle the girls be they short or tall,
Then follow young Mat whenever he calls,
To dance with Jak o' the Shadows."

Check out MyAnimeList and my Game Collection. Owner of the 5 millionth post.

Mr Khan on 13 November 2013
Frequency said:
orniletter said:
I apparently haven´t really played Mario Kart 7 online for free...because hardware id- whatsitsname.

And Miiverse doesn´t exist........seemingly

Your hardware ID was bounced to other hardware ids and the player with the lowest ping automatically set to host, which everyone else in the game is then connected to, the same goes for miiverse.

The only tangible service nintendo offers/offered is storage for sending drawn images to other users, and even then these are tiny monochrome files that are shunted off the server eventually.

The day you can buy a new console, login with a nintendo account and access all of your saves, purchases and profile data, is the day they will be providing a tangible coherant service network, until then youre just a hardware id being bounced around.

 

Mr Khan said:

Still fail to see the difference. If *all* games had dedicated servers, it would be worth it. If we're talking about content management, that's all stuff that's being monetized by, you know, buying the content. The rest is just a peer-to-peer run that they've duped gamers into paying for.

I suppose the difference is I have worked on games for Wii, WiiU, PS3 and 360 so I have an in depth knowledge of the network environments, so whether or not you fail to see a difference does not change the fact that there is one.

And yet you have not demonstrated as to *why* they feel the need to charge for this, and what exactly we're paying for that isn't already monetized by the purchase of software. Where's the beef?



Monster Hunter: pissing me off since 2010.