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

Forums - Microsoft - (Opinion) This is the LAST Xbox...!!!

Zappykins on 03 June 2015
Baryonyx said:


Nintendo cheated out Sony before Sony created the Ps1, that is common knowledge if i am not mistaken.
I also included that Sony wanted to create their own software, it's not that they said: We will destroy you microsoft.

The 360 released a year earlier so implying that the 360 was selling better because it had 10 mill consoles sold headstart would be weird.
We should count the amount of consoles both consoles sold during it's first year. The Ps3 outsold the 360 during it's first launch atleast enough to close a 10 mill gap during 10 years and surpass it. Which means they both was quite solid. The WiiU had 2 years headstart and managed to get crushed by both the Ps4 and the XB1 which should be considered embarressing on nintendo's part.

It seem to me that the Cell processor managed to do a lot more for the Ps3 then what the GPU managed to do for the XB1. Ofc the Devs preferred the XB360 due for the standard coding, which was similare to PC. It's not like they didn't want to utilize the cell but they didn't have the extra time to dedicate purely on the Ps3.. You know? Publishers and shit? Sony didn't exactly make it easier due for their attitude towards lazy developers which was a bad choice for Sony cause efficiency is as important as power which they could have changed the tide with a proper utilized Dev kit.

It's all in the past now. They are both going to use Custom tweaked off the shelves parts from now on... atleast they can't fuck us over with the lack backward compatibility now since the architecture will remain the same lol

Ok, heard it was the other way around - as it was with HD-DVD/Blu-Ray, VHS/Beta, Reviewer Fraud/Consumers but it may have happen  that way.

PS3/360 sales, yes OK.

"Cell processor managed to do a lot more for the Ps3 then what the GPU managed to do for the XB1."  Um, what?  You were making since, then this statement?  The Cell was a failure.  Futher shown by the fact Sony themselves dropped it.  They could hardly even  uss it in other things - it was supposed to be a powerful low cost innovation, but didn't really work out.  The 360s GPU has set the standard since.

"... atleast they can't fuck us over with the lack backward compatibility now since the architecture will remain the same lol"

I like your optimism, but they still could try to make up new excuses.  I could belive we might hear: "The PS5  is so much different that we can't get the PS4 games to work properly."  "Xbox Next uses DirectX (13 or 14) and the way it's optimised it doesn't work with Xbox One games."

 



 

Really not sure I see any point of Consol over PC's since Kinect, Wii and other alternative ways to play have been abandoned. 

Top 50 'most fun' game list coming soon!

 

Tell me a funny joke!
Around the Network
Eddie_Raja on 03 June 2015
Puppyroach said:
Eddie_Raja said:

Why they continue to try and shove Xbox down us PC gamer's throats we will never know...

Because it is their gaming brand?

Yeah but most PC gamers see it as the brand taking AWAY from their gaming.



Prediction for console Lifetime sales:

Wii:100-120 million, PS3:80-110 million, 360:70-100 million

[Prediction Made 11/5/2009]

3DS: 65m, PSV: 22m, Wii U: 18-22m, PS4: 80-120m, X1: 35-55m

I gauruntee the PS5 comes out after only 5-6 years after the launch of the PS4.

[Prediction Made 6/18/2014]

JNK on 03 June 2015
mjk45 said:
JNK said:
mjk45 said:
JNK said:
nintendo dont need to sell as many wii us as microsoft has to sell xbox´s to make profit. The wii us hardware is ALOT cheaper compared to xbox one but both consoles sell almost on the same price.

So if nintendo makes like 100 bucks per sold console but sony and microsoft are doing like 10 bucks the numbers wont count as much

No up untill recently  Nintendo was making a loss off every Wii U solid and a large one at that , mainly because of the cost of the pad , it is the main reason they where in the red after years of black ink.


i doubt the pad is that expensive. Probl 10-20$ not more. A complete iphone has 150$ material costs and dont use plastic old touchscreen in 480p

according to a CNN breakdown the  pad cost was $76 with $24 of that being the 6.1 inch screen , still no matter where the costs came , the fact was it was their first console to make a loss at retail .The consensus seemed to put it at around $50 per console , and that fits in with reggie saying one sold game made up for the loss.

I find that type of comment disengenius no matter who states it whether it's Sony,  Nintendo or MS,  because it makes it seem like the  price of one game wipes out the debt and we all know that Nintendo doesn't pocket all of the retail price and another thing people would have bought those games no matter what the consoles price was any way , the truth is making a profit from software doesn't in no way diminish the fact you have  lost money off the console the reason being those losses have still eaten away at those profits.

Still they now at least break even or make a small profit from WiiU sales so they at least don't have to worry about losing more money on ithe venture.


the amazon fire tablets are 70€ at retail. there are already 19% taxes included. It uses 720p screen and multitouch. has own cpu. 76$ production costs are way to much.



Baryonyx on 03 June 2015
Zappykins said:
Baryonyx said:
 


Nintendo cheated out Sony before Sony created the Ps1, that is common knowledge if i am not mistaken.
I also included that Sony wanted to create their own software, it's not that they said: We will destroy you microsoft.

The 360 released a year earlier so implying that the 360 was selling better because it had 10 mill consoles sold headstart would be weird.
We should count the amount of consoles both consoles sold during it's first year. The Ps3 outsold the 360 during it's first launch atleast enough to close a 10 mill gap during 10 years and surpass it. Which means they both was quite solid. The WiiU had 2 years headstart and managed to get crushed by both the Ps4 and the XB1 which should be considered embarressing on nintendo's part.

It seem to me that the Cell processor managed to do a lot more for the Ps3 then what the GPU managed to do for the XB1. Ofc the Devs preferred the XB360 due for the standard coding, which was similare to PC. It's not like they didn't want to utilize the cell but they didn't have the extra time to dedicate purely on the Ps3.. You know? Publishers and shit? Sony didn't exactly make it easier due for their attitude towards lazy developers which was a bad choice for Sony cause efficiency is as important as power which they could have changed the tide with a proper utilized Dev kit.

It's all in the past now. They are both going to use Custom tweaked off the shelves parts from now on... atleast they can't fuck us over with the lack backward compatibility now since the architecture will remain the same lol

Ok, heard it was the other way around - as it was with HD-DVD/Blu-Ray, VHS/Beta, Reviewer Fraud/Consumers but it may have happen  that way.

PS3/360 sales, yes OK.

"Cell processor managed to do a lot more for the Ps3 then what the GPU managed to do for the XB1."  Um, what?  You were making since, then this statement?  The Cell was a failure.  Futher shown by the fact Sony themselves dropped it.  They could hardly even  uss it in other things - it was supposed to be a powerful low cost innovation, but didn't really work out.  The 360s GPU has set the standard since.

"... atleast they can't fuck us over with the lack backward compatibility now since the architecture will remain the same lol"

I like your optimism, but they still could try to make up new excuses.  I could belive we might hear: "The PS5  is so much different that we can't get the PS4 games to work properly."  "Xbox Next uses DirectX (13 or 14) and the way it's optimised it doesn't work with Xbox One games."

 


So the Cell was a failure? according to who?  Yes it was difficult to work with and it was bottlenecked by the GPU but in itself it was not a failure, the only thing that made it a failure was lazy developers who prefered to port games to the Ps3 and downgrade it instead of actually coding the game for the Ps3.
Developers finally caught up on it after 2010, and the games started to perform more or less the same on both consoles. TLOU would have been downgraded heavily on the 360 if it was later ported to the 360. The 360 is simply not strong enough to run that game on the same settings as on the Ps3.
Atleast the Cell ended up sucsessfull in the end, while the *secret sauce in the XB1* is nothing but a false dream. The Dx12 will not give the same results as the Cell gave for the Ps3 towards the end.  The fate of the cell was decided by the devs not by the hardware in itself. Atleast learn how to differentiate the difference between the lack of optimization failure and hardware failure. if something was a failure on the Ps3 it was the gpu.



 

PSN: Opticstrike90
Steam: opticstrike90

Landguy on 03 June 2015
Baryonyx said:

Nintendo cheated out Sony before Sony created the Ps1, that is common knowledge if i am not mistaken.
I also included that Sony wanted to create their own software, it's not that they said: We will destroy you microsoft.

The 360 released a year earlier so implying that the 360 was selling better because it had 10 mill consoles sold headstart would be weird.
We should count the amount of consoles both consoles sold during it's first year. The Ps3 outsold the 360 during it's first launch atleast enough to close a 10 mill gap during 10 years and surpass it. Which means they both was quite solid. The WiiU had 2 years headstart and managed to get crushed by both the Ps4 and the XB1 which should be considered embarressing on nintendo's part.

It seem to me that the Cell processor managed to do a lot more for the Ps3 then what the GPU managed to do for the XB1. Ofc the Devs preferred the XB360 due for the standard coding, which was similare to PC. It's not like they didn't want to utilize the cell but they didn't have the extra time to dedicate purely on the Ps3.. You know? Publishers and shit? Sony didn't exactly make it easier due for their attitude towards lazy developers which was a bad choice for Sony cause efficiency is as important as power which they could have changed the tide with a proper utilized Dev kit.

It's all in the past now. They are both going to use Custom tweaked off the shelves parts from now on... atleast they can't fuck us over with the lack backward compatibility now since the architecture will remain the same lol

Not that it matters much, But the 360 only had a 6 million unit lead when the PS3 launched.  Also, the WiiU came out only 12 months ahead of the XB1 and the PS4.



It is near the end of the end....

Around the Network
Zappykins on 03 June 2015
Baryonyx said:
Zappykins said:

Ok, heard it was the other way around - as it was with HD-DVD/Blu-Ray, VHS/Beta, Reviewer Fraud/Consumers but it may have happen  that way.

PS3/360 sales, yes OK.

"Cell processor managed to do a lot more for the Ps3 then what the GPU managed to do for the XB1."  Um, what?  You were making since, then this statement?  The Cell was a failure.  Futher shown by the fact Sony themselves dropped it.  They could hardly even  uss it in other things - it was supposed to be a powerful low cost innovation, but didn't really work out.  The 360s GPU has set the standard since.

"... atleast they can't fuck us over with the lack backward compatibility now since the architecture will remain the same lol"

I like your optimism, but they still could try to make up new excuses.  I could belive we might hear: "The PS5  is so much different that we can't get the PS4 games to work properly."  "Xbox Next uses DirectX (13 or 14) and the way it's optimised it doesn't work with Xbox One games."

 


So the Cell was a failure? according to who?  Yes it was difficult to work with and it was bottlenecked by the GPU but in itself it was not a failure, the only thing that made it a failure was lazy developers who prefered to port games to the Ps3 and downgrade it instead of actually coding the game for the Ps3.
Developers finally caught up on it after 2010, and the games started to perform more or less the same on both consoles. TLOU would have been downgraded heavily on the 360 if it was later ported to the 360. The 360 is simply not strong enough to run that game on the same settings as on the Ps3.
Atleast the Cell ended up sucsessfull in the end, while the *secret sauce in the XB1* is nothing but a false dream. The Dx12 will not give the same results as the Cell gave for the Ps3 towards the end.  The fate of the cell was decided by the devs not by the hardware in itself. Atleast learn how to differentiate the difference between the lack of optimization failure and hardware failure. if something was a failure on the Ps3 it was the gpu.

Oh, is the Cell being used now in new Tech?   Is the Cell being upgraded to Cell 2.0?  Was it such a bad investment that Sony stopped making CPU's in the consoles and hire someone else?

"The PlayStation 4 will not use Sony's Cell processor nor any possible successor to the vaunted chipset that was introduced to the world through the PlayStation 3, gaming industry sources tell Kotaku." http://kotaku.com/5889410/playstation-4-ditching-the-cell-processor-sources-say-which-leads-to-some-wild-theories

If it was so great why didn't they just share their 'magic powerful tool' with other game developers?   Wouldn't Sony want the world to ditch the x84 for the Cell?  So Sony doesn't want that propitary monopoly they have been trying to get for the last few decades?

Oh, you just want to bash the Xboxes?  Ok, why didn't you just say so.



 

Really not sure I see any point of Consol over PC's since Kinect, Wii and other alternative ways to play have been abandoned. 

Top 50 'most fun' game list coming soon!

 

Tell me a funny joke!
Azzanation on 10 June 2015
Azuren said:
Azzanation said:
The XB1 is the fastest selling Xbox in history and it did it in only 13 countries for its launch year. I believe there wont be any more consoles after this gen apart from Nintendo's offerings. There's too much money missed by Sony and MS with its own hardware. PSN and Live will be available on PC in the next few years with a subscription based model to play there games. Not only does it save Sony and MS billions on RnD for there consoles but gives a greater access to there games. With PCs now capable of using DS4s and XB1 controllers there isn't a need for them anymore. Its my opinion, and as I said, there's too much money missed. Imagine the sales on UC4 or Halo 5 if its available to everyone? TLOU sold 7m on the PS3 alone and Halo 4 sold 9m on the 360. These numbers will double if the exclusive wall wasn't there.

Except they're already working on the new consoles and have admitted it... The only reason consoles aren't selling as well this gen as last is because the casuals have moved to phones. 

I semi agree. Consoles are in the works but i dont see them being exclusive machines anymore. There gaming Apps will be avaialble to all to play. Consoles will be multimedia machines like the PS3 for its Blu-Ray or the XB1 for its TV apps etc. There not going to be just gaming Consoles like Nintendos. MS are already moving Live to all there devices and Sony will follow shortly.



Azzanation on 10 June 2015
Eddie_Raja said:
Puppyroach said:

Because it is their gaming brand?

Yeah but most PC gamers see it as the brand taking AWAY from their gaming.


I am a PC gamer, look me up on Steam, i have over 600+ games plus Battle.net which i play all of Blizzards masterpieces which i constantly use. The Xbox is a nice refresher and a welcome addition to my gaming library as there games resemble more PC style then any other brand in the gaming world. I am glad its there, games like Killer Instinct, Halo, Forza, Rare, Gears and many other great games are must haves for me. As for 3rd party my PC is the best place to buy them. 1st party, Xbox is awesome.



Eddie_Raja on 10 June 2015
Azzanation said:
Eddie_Raja said:

Yeah but most PC gamers see it as the brand taking AWAY from their gaming.


I am a PC gamer, look me up on Steam, i have over 600+ games plus Battle.net which i play all of Blizzards masterpieces which i constantly use. The Xbox is a nice refresher and a welcome addition to my gaming library as there games resemble more PC style then any other brand in the gaming world. I am glad its there, games like Killer Instinct, Halo, Forza, Rare, Gears and many other great games are must haves for me. As for 3rd party my PC is the best place to buy them. 1st party, Xbox is awesome.


Look I don't claim to speak for all PC gamers.  I do know that me and at the very least every one of my PC gamer friends finds it stupid.



Prediction for console Lifetime sales:

Wii:100-120 million, PS3:80-110 million, 360:70-100 million

[Prediction Made 11/5/2009]

3DS: 65m, PSV: 22m, Wii U: 18-22m, PS4: 80-120m, X1: 35-55m

I gauruntee the PS5 comes out after only 5-6 years after the launch of the PS4.

[Prediction Made 6/18/2014]

Eddie_Raja on 10 June 2015
Puppyroach said:
Eddie_Raja said:

Why they continue to try and shove Xbox down us PC gamer's throats we will never know...

Because it is their gaming brand?


Yeah and it used to be that they would be on PC.  If it weren't for Steam PC gaming would have all but died.



Prediction for console Lifetime sales:

Wii:100-120 million, PS3:80-110 million, 360:70-100 million

[Prediction Made 11/5/2009]

3DS: 65m, PSV: 22m, Wii U: 18-22m, PS4: 80-120m, X1: 35-55m

I gauruntee the PS5 comes out after only 5-6 years after the launch of the PS4.

[Prediction Made 6/18/2014]