By using this site, you agree to our Privacy Policy and our Terms of Use. Close
irstupid on 01 October 2013
Edit Thread
thismeintiel said:
Max King of the Wild said:
TruckOSaurus said:

If you wanna see it that way go ahead but that means that in your view, Kinect on XBO is just an extra bonus too. My point is that having Kinect with every XBO is the same than having a Blu-Ray player in every PS3 and it still stands. They're both unnecessary components that every consummer is forced to buy whether they want it or not.


Not at all. Both RAM and a Disc Drive are essential components to a gaming machine. Increasing specs the following gen is not the same as forcing someone to buy a peripheral

I think this is the main point of the argument.  Blu-ray was a step up in something that was NECESSARY for the console to even operate.  Kinect is a peripheral that is 100% UNECESSARY to play games, yet you have to buy just to get the system (at least this year).  Blu-ray has proved itself necessary, as games continue to get larger and larger.  And if Sony didn't bite the bullet this gen (the PS3 actually cost $800+ to make, but launched at the same price as the One is launching at, $499), then we would be seeing those upfront costs/losses added to this gen.  This would mean Sony would have to charge more for the PS4 or take a larger loss.  And MS would have most likely stayed with DVDs, again, causing almost all of their games to require 2 or more DVDs.

Like I said earlier, though, I fully expect most of these posters to bactrack when MS releases a Kinectless SKU.  You will no longer hear about how "everyone has the same console experience" or that "the One is built around Kinect."  Instead you will hear them praise MS for "lowering the price" and "it's a great business decision" and "they are giving consumer's a choice."

1.How is it necessary?

You can download games and play them correct?  Are they using the blu ray drive in any way?

How come every single game is not exclusive that is on the PS3.  If a Blu Ray drive was NECESSARY then how can those games be available for the 360?  The 360 doesn't have a Blu Ray drive, so obviously those games can't work then right.   Blu Ray was not needed.  There were cheaper ways, such as dvd's.

 

2.  Nintendo doesn't use Blu Ray, yet its disc hold like 50+ gigs i believe.  Isn't that about what Blu Ray holds?  So Blu Ray format again is NOT NEEDED. There are substitutes.  Now for the PS4 and Sony, Blu Ray probbaly is the cheapest thing to use, but back when PS3 was launched it was not.

Personally i don't think Blu Ray is needed anyway.  I think that these large disc sizes has just made developers lazier and taking up useless space.  Heck look at some of Nintendo gamecube games.  Look how freaking small they were in size and some of th emost impressive games barely even used that size.  Then look at some pathetic games on the 360/ps3 and they are using up almost the entire disc space.  I see this often too when buying a pc version of a game.  A PC exclusive i'll have takes up like 5-10 gigs of my hard-drive and then I buy a mediocre console port to pc and it takes up like 25 gigs.  It's like wtf.