thismeintiel said:
irstupid said:
thismeintiel said:
Max King of the Wild said:
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.
|
Your whole argument is voided by my last reply. Nintendo's Wii U discs are based on Blu-ray tech. No Blu-ray, no Wii U discs. Of course, like you said, they could have just used DVDs. I mean if they just wanted to start having every game come with more than 1 disc, which raises costs, too. But, it looks like Nintendo, and MS for that matter, have now deemed Blu-ray to be necessary. I guess it's a good thing Sony helped invent that, huh?
|
You last reply did nothing. How do you guys not get yet that blu ray is just a storage disc, or format. It could be replaced by a flash disc, flash drive, dvd, cd, floppy disc, hd-dvd, any other random disc propriety out there. What the game on doesn't change how its played. Heck being on a flash drive or cartridge or something like that would actually make the game run BETTER. So if we want to be 100% consumer friendly, then wouldn't the best and/or cheapest method be consumer friendly? Isn't Sony using a more expensive method than available anti-consumer?
How many games on 360 required more than one disc?
We are talking about PS3 here, not ps4/one/wii u.
You guys say Kinect is an unneeded expense cause you won't use it for games. I'm saying in that argument then so is blu ray on ps3. It wasn't needed for games. Even if you dislike switching discs blu ray wasn't needed. There were very few games that made you switch discs on 360. VERY FEW.
