Xbox one is coming


Video Games

1,351 to 1,400 of 1,540 << first < prev | 21 | 22 | 23 | 24 | 25 | 26 | 27 | 28 | 29 | 30 | 31 | next > last >>

1 person marked this as a favorite.
Uzzy wrote:
QXL99 wrote:
Only if you have the money/time/know-how to constantly update your rig as new games come out. Some of us don't...
The amount of money/time and know-how needed is always overstated. You can run games just fine on a rig that would cost about the same as a next gen console, and there are countless buyers guides out there to help you out. Building guides are also available, and it's a lot easier to put a PC together then it was five or ten years ago.

Over the years I have bought at least a half-dozen PC games that would not run on my system, even when the PC was less than a year old at the time. Sometimes I never did find out why they wouldn't play. I'd rather buy a console game I know will play, since after it's been opened PC software cannot be returned...


Uzzy wrote:
Meanwhile, PC Gaming has gone from 'dead' to thriving.

Don't mean to jump into a conversation but after reading this, I just thought I'd add this:

PCs in decline

Now I know you were talking about PC "gaming" thriving, but how long can that last if the whole of the PC industry is in decline?

Personally we do all of our gaming on either consoles (mostly XBox 360 but we also have a Wii and PS2 kicking around) or handhelds (iPads, iPhones, DSes and 1 Vita). Our computers are for work or master storage of digital media.

Greg

Sovereign Court

GregH wrote:
Uzzy wrote:
Meanwhile, PC Gaming has gone from 'dead' to thriving.

Don't mean to jump into a conversation but after reading this, I just thought I'd add this:

PCs in decline

Now I know you were talking about PC "gaming" thriving, but how long can that last if the whole of the PC industry is in decline?

Personally we do all of our gaming on either consoles (mostly XBox 360 but we also have a Wii and PS2 kicking around) or handhelds (iPads, iPhones, DSes and 1 Vita). Our computers are for work or master storage of digital media.

Greg

It can do well, to be honest. Games can run on tablets, after all, and services like Steam are in a far better position to exploit that market these days, given the love of cheap gaming that Steam has.

Your classic RTS games or MMOs are going to struggle on tablets, but indie platformers and the like should do well. Heck, even Baldur's Gate is available on Android Tablet.


Uzzy wrote:

It can do well, to be honest. Games can run on tablets, after all, and services like Steam are in a far better position to exploit that market these days, given the love of cheap gaming that Steam has.

Your classic RTS games or MMOs are going to struggle on tablets, but indie platformers and the like should do well. Heck, even Baldur's Gate is available on Android Tablet.

I think what you are going to see is a shift in the game develment model. More ambitious games are going to become the niche market and more scaled down games are going to become the norm. For example, I'm a huge X-Com fan from the old days. I could've bought the new one for the 360 but I have young kids in the house and won't play an M rated game when they can walk into the living room and see it. So I waited and this week bought it for my iPad. It's great and I'm glad I waited. From what I understand the only real difference between the mobile and console/PC version is the number of random maps (~30 down from ~50) Now I can play it when I want to without concern of young eyes seeing it. And it plays great. (Turns out in this case I don't think the M rating is warranted but I didn't know that when I bought it.)

I was also a big Starcraft fan, and bought part 1 of SC2. But I've decided I won't be buying part 2 anytime soon simply because I don't want to lock myself up in my office where the computer is to play games.

Greg


Uzzy wrote:
Scott Betts wrote:
People need to stop acting like there's no sensible reason to own a console. It's not a particularly well thought-out position.

Of course there are sensible reasons to own a console. It's just that those reasons are getting fewer and fewer as the PC Gaming Scene steps up to the plate in a massive way. Sure, if your PC hardware develops a fault, then you might have trouble, but that's why warranties exist. Steam has done a lot to unify the online gaming structure, making it a lot easier to connect with other people you want to game with. And you can even plug your PC into your TV screen and play games on the sofa with a controller in hand, should you wish to. Infact, there's a growing interest in building Mini ITX PC's that can sit discreetly in your living room, connected to your TV screen and working as a home theatre and gaming rig.

Had you asked me four years ago, I'd have laughed off a gaming PC as an overly expensive, elitist waste, only good for MMOs. But man, things have changed. Consoles now only have ease of use over PC's (something that is lessening all the time) and exclusives going for them. Not that tempting anymore.

Actually, if anything is making consoles seem pointless, it isn't that PC gaming is getting better. It's that console games are sucking far, far more. Specifically...adopting godawful aspects of PC gaming. Like having to pay for downloadable content that used to just be part of the game. Or a game getting released with bugs because they can just patch it later. Or the recent issue (that I guarantee you someone will try again the second the public forgets about the Xbone trying it) of "licensing" and not actually owning your games.

The first time I got my PS3 and turned it on, I was informed that it needed to install possibly years worth of updates (I just got it like 2 1/2 years ago) and had to wait around staring at a loading screen for at least 10 minutes. All I could think of was how a console used to just...turn on and start working, and how nice that was. I thought, "wow, this is just like getting a new computer." And then sarcastically, "...awesome..."

People get console games instead of PC because they HATE that bs. And yet, they keep embracing it more and more! As I said way back in this thread, I have been a bit of a conspiracy theorist on this ever since MS first announced the Xbox, that since MS is the king of computer gaming, the entire thing was a ploy to try and blend the features of computer and console gaming to the point that consoles seemed pointless and everyone switched over to PC gaming. Maybe I'm wrong on that, but it certainly seems to be the case.

Sovereign Court

GregH wrote:

I think what you are going to see is a shift in the game develment model. More ambitious games are going to become the niche market and more scaled down games are going to become the norm. For example, I'm a huge X-Com fan from the old days. I could've bought the new one for the 360 but I have young kids in the house and won't play an M rated game when they can walk into the living room and see it. So I waited and this week bought it for my iPad. It's great and I'm glad I waited. From what I understand the only real difference between the mobile and console/PC version is the number of random maps (~30 down from ~50) Now I can play it when I want to without concern of young eyes seeing it. And it plays great. (Turns out in this case I don't think the M rating is warranted but I didn't know that when I bought it.)

I was also a big Starcraft fan, and bought part 1 of SC2. But I've decided I won't be buying part 2 anytime soon simply because I don't want to lock myself up in my office where the computer is to play games.

Greg

I'm glad to hear you're enjoying the new X-Com, it really is a great game and well worth playing on whatever device you have. I also think you're correct that the bigger, more ambitious, triple A games are going to be the niche market, which can only be a good thing really to my mind. So many titles and development companies have been ruined by trying to go after that triple A market, when it really can't support that many games.

I'm also hopeful for more sensible pricing to come from this new model. Not every game should cost £40/$60.


Are you thinking of Amalur by chance?

Sovereign Court

StreamOfTheSky wrote:


Actually, if anything is making consoles seem pointless, it isn't that PC gaming is getting better. It's that console games are sucking far, far more. Specifically...adopting godawful aspects of PC gaming. Like having to pay for downloadable content that used to just be part of the game. Or a game getting released with bugs because they can just patch it later. Or the recent issue (that I guarantee you someone will try again the second the public forgets about the Xbone trying it) of "licensing" and not actually owning your games.

Also very true. Lets not forget that Steam was hated when it was first introduced and tried to bring in those sorts of restrictions. But now it's a mature platform that's become very well loved. Why? Because they put in massive benefits in addition to the restrictions. Constant sales, community stuff, downloading games easily and having updates download in the background.

Microsoft forgot that a tradeoff is needed. Or at least didn't spend enough time talking about the benefits of the new system.

Sovereign Court

QXL99 wrote:
Over the years I have bought at least a half-dozen PC games that would not run on my system, even when the PC was less than a year old at the time. Sometimes I never did find out why they wouldn't play. I'd rather buy a console game I know will play, since after it's been opened PC software cannot be returned...

I do sympathise with your problems. It always sucks to buy something and not have it work. Though, I am surprised that you weren't able to get them running, especially if your PC was a modern one.


Rynjin wrote:
Not quite free even if it's under warranty, since they make you pay shipping. Comes out to about $100 all told.

No, it doesn't.

Sony does not charge for shipping if you are covered by warranty:

"SCEA will send you a package via courier service that contains a customized shipping box for you to pack your system, a prepaid shipping label addressed to our service facility, and documents with detailed instructions on how to pack and return your system."

Even if you're not in-warranty, the total shipping charge for the PS3 is only $29. Not even close to $100.

Microsoft does not charge you for shipping, period:

"Who pays for console shipping?

We pay for all Xbox 360 console shipping, including to and from our service center."

I should know. I've used their shipping system twice.

Quote:
Figuring out what the issue is isn't as difficult as you'd have me believe either.

Yes, it is. It is so difficult as to be essentially impossible for someone without a working knowledge of computer hardware interactions. If my mother's computer stopped working, she would have literally no ability whatsoever to figure out where the problem was.


Uzzy wrote:
QXL99 wrote:
Over the years I have bought at least a half-dozen PC games that would not run on my system, even when the PC was less than a year old at the time. Sometimes I never did find out why they wouldn't play. I'd rather buy a console game I know will play, since after it's been opened PC software cannot be returned...
I do sympathise with your problems. It always sucks to buy something and not have it work. Though, I am surprised that you weren't able to get them running, especially if your PC was a modern one.

Yeah, this is a really strange problem to have nowadays. A modern PC with a passable, dedicated graphics card should be able to run essentially everything, though at lower settings in some cases. This sounds like QXL99 may have an actual problem with his computer.


Scott Betts wrote:


No, it doesn't.

Sony does not charge for shipping if you are covered by warranty:

"SCEA will send you a package via courier service that contains a customized shipping box for you to pack your system, a prepaid shipping label addressed to our service facility, and documents with detailed instructions on how to pack and return your system."

Even if you're not in-warranty, the total shipping charge for the PS3 is only $29. Not even close to $100.

Microsoft does not charge you for shipping, period:

"Who pays for console shipping?

We pay for all Xbox 360 console shipping, including to and from our service center."

I should know. I've used their shipping system twice.

Ah. I didn't know that. Last time I had a console break was my PS2.

That clause didn't exist at the time. Or maybe my warranty was already out by then, I can't remember which.

Scott Betts wrote:


Yes, it is. It is so difficult as to be essentially impossible for someone without a working knowledge of computer hardware interactions. If my mother's computer stopped working, she would have literally no ability whatsoever to figure out where the problem was.

And if your mother's Wii stopped working it would be essentially impossible for her to figure out what's wrong too.

At the very least when you crack open your PC you don't void your warranty, unless they've changed that policy too over the years.

And there are all these nice websites you could access from the local library or whatever like Tom's Hardware and 9 times out of 10 the general problem you have will have a specific cause shared by other people, that may or may not have a fix you can easily do yourself.

If not, at the very least you know what is probably the cause and can tell whoever you want to repair it exactly what's wrong.

Scott Betts wrote:
Yeah, this is a really strange problem to have nowadays. A modern PC with a passable, dedicated graphics card should be able to run essentially everything, though at lower settings in some cases. This sounds like QXL99 may have an actual problem with his computer.

Yeah. There are some games that are hilariously unoptimized (Team Fortress 2 is one) but for the most part if you tweak the graphics a bit and your computer was up to date within the past 3-4 years you should be able to run most anything.


Rynjin wrote:
And if your mother's Wii stopped working it would be essentially impossible for her to figure out what's wrong too.

She wouldn't need to. She could call Nintendo's tech support, they'd set up a service ticket, send her a box with instructions, and she'd be done. There is no need to diagnose the problem, because the same company fixes all the problems. They'll do it for her.


GregH wrote:


Uzzy wrote:


Meanwhile, PC Gaming has gone from 'dead' to thriving.

Don't mean to jump into a conversation but after reading this, I just thought I'd add this:

PCs in decline

Now I know you were talking about PC "gaming" thriving, but how long can that last if the whole of the PC industry is in decline?

Personally we do all of our gaming on either consoles (mostly XBox 360 but we also have a Wii and PS2 kicking around) or handhelds (iPads, iPhones, DSes and 1 Vita). Our computers are for work or master storage of digital media.

Greg

The decline in PC sales is on the low end. Machines that weren't, largely, used for gaming to begin with. They were used for E-mail, social media and web browsing. That can be done easily on a tablet or smart phone for about the same $ or less. And tablets / smart phones are portable. A good gaming rig is more expensive, but it will run a triple A title that no tablet / phone will run. Consoles, for the first year or two of their life span, can match the abilities of a decent PC. After that they fade back.

And some people, gamers with jobs, don't mind spending more money to get more performance. My current gaming rig is a Sager 17" laptop. It has a quad core processor (Core i7 one step below "extreme") capable of running 8 threads simultaneously. It has 16 gigs of DDR3 ram, a 750 gig 7200 rpm hard drive, and a Radeon 7970 video card with 2 gigs of video ram. In short, at 9 months of age, it meets / exceeds every spec of the new console generation that will not come out until Fall when it will be a year old. It cost far more at my time of purchase (just under 3k). By now, with a new gen of core i7 just down the pike and newer video cards available (Nvidia's 680 mobility with 4 gigs of video ram for example became available a month after I bought my rig) it would be cheaper (or better). It will play any game that comes out in the next 4 years or so. If I upgrade it will give a superior performance to a console for the entire 4 years of it's life and most of the consoles life. And then I will buy a new one. My old Alienware 17" laptop which is 5 years old now will still play pretty much any game out, but not at the best resolutions etc. btw. If I had been on a budget (more of one anyway) I could have upgraded it and gotten by for a couple more years no problem.

My kids play both console and PC, depending on the title. I keep track of console hard ware as a result.


Scott Betts wrote:
Rynjin wrote:
And if your mother's Wii stopped working it would be essentially impossible for her to figure out what's wrong too.
She wouldn't need to. She could call Nintendo's tech support, they'd set up a service ticket, send her a box with instructions, and she'd be done. There is no need to diagnose the problem, because the same company fixes all the problems. They'll do it for her.

Never having dealt with Nintendo's tech support, I can't speak to their quality and efficiency.

But you'll spend just as many hours in frustration with Microsoft's tech support as you would self-diagnosing your computer, and probably get farther in the end game.

I'm not even sure why this is an argument. It's the same process all around for both consoles and PCs.

Except with a PC you usually have the option to try and fix it yourself.


Rynjin wrote:
But you'll spend just as many hours in frustration with Microsoft's tech support as you would self-diagnosing your computer, and probably get farther in the end game.

What? No, you won't. I've used Microsoft's tech support to repair consoles twice, and in that same eight year span of ownership I've encountered easily a half dozen hardware problems on the various computers I've owned (HDD failure, SSD failure, graphics card failure, mobo bridge failure, PSU failure, laptop power converter failure, just off the top of my head). Many of those took some really in-depth work to diagnose properly - especially if the POST sequence didn't point in the right direction. Meanwhile, my chat with Microsoft wasn't much more involved than, "Yeah, my 360 is showing red error lights in the upper-left, lower-left, and lower-right quadrants."

And, most importantly, calling Microsoft tech support is something that someone unfamiliar with computers can actually do.


GregH wrote:
Uzzy wrote:
Meanwhile, PC Gaming has gone from 'dead' to thriving.

Don't mean to jump into a conversation but after reading this, I just thought I'd add this:

PCs in decline

Now I know you were talking about PC "gaming" thriving, but how long can that last if the whole of the PC industry is in decline?

Personally we do all of our gaming on either consoles (mostly XBox 360 but we also have a Wii and PS2 kicking around) or handhelds (iPads, iPhones, DSes and 1 Vita). Our computers are for work or master storage of digital media.

Greg

I really hate this argument. They show no actual evidence that tablet sales are impeding new computer sales, but draw the conclusion that it is the only possible explanation. Meanwhile, I can think of numberous alternate theories as to why new sales would be slumping.

1. Increased useable lifespan on PCs. When I bought my first computer, I expected to replace it in 2 years, and I did. That second computer lasted me 3 years before needing to be replaced. I have had my latest computer for 6 years and don't have a plan on replacing or upgrading it until I see how game specs change from the new line of consoles. I have yet to play a game I can't run at close to the highest grafics settings, though I do not play that many high end graphics games.

When my brother's college mandated laptops in 1998, it was a serious concern that they wouldn't be very functional by the time students graduated 4 years later, and there was a massive number of seniors in his graduating class replacing them with newer models. The freshman laptops from 10 years later, now 6 years old, are working and not in need of replacement except from physical failures. They are reaching the end of their usable life, but it has taken them twice as long to get there. Hell, one of my friends booted up a 10 year old school laptop this weekend to run a game at a lan party - it wasn't even a gaming rig when new.

2. Market saturation: The number of people who do not have a computer in their home is shrinking drastically. Sales to 1st time computer owners are shrinking because there are fewer 1st time owners available. Those who still do not have a computer in 1st world countries are increasingly unlikely to buy one.

So with fewer people to sell new computers to and fewer people needing replacements, sales numbers are down. Why are analysts suprised or alarmed by this data and looking for other excuses?

Finally, why would developing games for consoles be a bad investment, when they obviously have the largest install base? The anual PC sales on this downward slump is close to total sales of all Xbox 360s.


Uzzy wrote:
Scott Betts wrote:
People need to stop acting like there's no sensible reason to own a console. It's not a particularly well thought-out position.

Of course there are sensible reasons to own a console. It's just that those reasons are getting fewer and fewer as the PC Gaming Scene steps up to the plate in a massive way. Sure, if your PC hardware develops a fault, then you might have trouble, but that's why warranties exist. Steam has done a lot to unify the online gaming structure, making it a lot easier to connect with other people you want to game with. And you can even plug your PC into your TV screen and play games on the sofa with a controller in hand, should you wish to. Infact, there's a growing interest in building Mini ITX PC's that can sit discreetly in your living room, connected to your TV screen and working as a home theatre and gaming rig.

Had you asked me four years ago, I'd have laughed off a gaming PC as an overly expensive, elitist waste, only good for MMOs. But man, things have changed. Consoles now only have ease of use over PC's (something that is lessening all the time) and exclusives going for them. Not that tempting anymore.

I would argue that consoles no longer have the ease of use factor over PCs. It is harder for em to boot up a new game on my Xbox 360 than it is for me to install and play one on my computer. Microsoft has done a remarkable job at continuously making the menues less intuitive, harder to navigate, and increasingly filled with junk.


Caineach wrote:
I would argue that consoles no longer have the ease of use factor over PCs. It is harder for em to boot up a new game on my Xbox 360 than it is for me to install and play one on my computer.

The ability to install a game is not the only facet to ease-of-use. Installing a game is roughly as difficult on a console as on PC. There are plenty of other aspects to use, however, that are far easier on consoles than on PCs. See the discussion above on repairs. Also: adding peripherals, confirming system requirements, managing graphical properties, etc.

Quote:
Microsoft has done a remarkable job at continuously making the menues less intuitive, harder to navigate, and increasingly filled with junk.

I haven't found the Xbox dash to be particularly unintuitive (especially compared to PC operating systems). The biggest complaint I have is that apps are occasionally sorted into odd categories.


I used to love the Xbox dashboard, but that was like 5 updates ago.

It went downhill from the time they added the Bing searchbar and started rearranging everything into weird green boxes.


Scott Betts wrote:
Caineach wrote:
I would argue that consoles no longer have the ease of use factor over PCs. It is harder for em to boot up a new game on my Xbox 360 than it is for me to install and play one on my computer.

The ability to install a game is not the only facet to ease-of-use. Installing a game is roughly as difficult on a console as on PC. There are plenty of other aspects to use, however, that are far easier on consoles than on PCs. See the discussion above on repairs. Also: adding peripherals, confirming system requirements, managing graphical properties, etc.

People actually wory about system requirements still? Seriously? I have a 6 year old computer and it has yet to run into a game I can't run on high graphics settings. Sure, it was orriginally set up as a $1500 gaming rig, but now I could buy a better comp for under $500.

How often are you buying new periferals? Most people wont ever use any besides their mouse and keyboard. The hardcore people may use x-box controlers for games too. Realistically, this is a non-issue for the vast majority of players.

The only thing that you get out of managing graphical properties is better results than what your console can do. You do it once, and it takes maybe a minute. Perhaps a second minute if you decide you need to turn your graphics down later.

Quote:


Quote:
Microsoft has done a remarkable job at continuously making the menues less intuitive, harder to navigate, and increasingly filled with junk.
I haven't found the Xbox dash to be particularly unintuitive (especially compared to PC operating systems). The biggest complaint I have is that apps are occasionally sorted into odd categories.

Do you also like Windows 8, the most unintuitive PoS I have ever seen? They have the same terrible design philophy, but at least windows 8 doesn't insist on adding advertisements into your gui. Every itteration of the X-Box opperating system has made it harder to just start the game. I was pissed when I had to upgrade my OS to play Halo.


Caineach wrote:
People actually wory about system requirements still? Seriously? I have a 6 year old computer and it has yet to run into a game I can't run on high graphics settings. Sure, it was orriginally set up as a $1500 gaming rig, but now I could buy a better comp for under $500.

Not necessarily about being able to run games, but certainly about being able to run them at a satisfactory level of playability.

There definitely are people who need to worry about what their machine can and cannot run, though. I own a Surface Pro, which is actually a remarkably powerful tablet hybrid (4 gb RAM, a Core i5 processor, 1080p display, full Windows 8, etc.) but it is limited in what it is able to run by its integrated Intel HD 4000 graphics chipset. There are certain titles that my Surface simply does not meet the requirements for. And even for full-on laptop-format machines, graphics demands can easily exceed what they're capable of providing.

Quote:
How often are you buying new periferals? Most people wont ever use any besides their mouse and keyboard. The hardcore people may use x-box controlers for games too. Realistically, this is a non-issue for the vast majority of players.

Many people prefer controllers for certain games - I have a few games sitting in my Steam library (Sonic Generations, Burnout Paradise Ultimate, etc.) that I'm waiting on until I go out and buy a wired 360 controller to plug into my PC, because they respond better to controller input (which have advantages like analog sticks and pressure-sensitive buttons). I don't play fighting games to any active extent, but I don't know very many people who would consider a keyboard and mouse (realistically, just the keyboard) an acceptable input choice, regardless of how "hardcore" they are. I also have a flightstick that I picked up to play IL-2, and I'll probably pick up a more robust flightstick to replace it when Star Citizen comes out. And that's to say nothing of the ability to play games like Rock Band on consoles, which can accept as many as seven individual instrument inputs, each with their own specialized controller design. We also haven't even touched on novel control inputs like the Wii's motion control, or Kinect game integration (yes, there is a Kinect for Windows SDK, but it's not currently being utilized for PC games).

Quote:
The only thing that you get out of managing graphical properties is better results than what your console can do.

Not necessarily. You're thinking from the perspective of someone with a relatively powerful gaming PC. But someone whose PC struggles to hit acceptable framerates on modern games will also want to be able to use the graphical properties settings to turn down graphical quality in favor of increasing performance.

Quote:
You do it once, and it takes maybe a minute. Perhaps a second minute if you decide you need to turn your graphics down later.

I'm not talking about a time requirement. I'm talking about the fact that there are tons of fairly casual gamers out there who have absolutely no idea that turning off HDR lighting or dropping your anisotropic sampling to a lower value can improve a game's playability. That is a barrier to ease of use!

Quote:
Do you also like Windows 8, the most unintuitive PoS I have ever seen?

Actually, I do. Windows 8 does what it sets out to do very well. It's a shock to the system for those who have been long-accustomed to traditional Windows desktops but, once you grok the logic behind it, makes a number of tasks far faster (which is in part - but not entirely - due to performance gains over Windows 7). I can search for and execute a program on my Surface faster than I could possibly do on my Windows 7 desktop.

In fact, Windows 8 is one of the most naturally intuitive interfaces I've seen for a desktop OS (most users already agree it's a great touch interface). The problem is that people (like yourself) easily mistake familiarity for intuitiveness, and then start calling things that they get hung up on (because they violate the convention you're accustomed to) "unintuitive".

Quote:
Every itteration of the X-Box opperating system has made it harder to just start the game.

That's funny. I have a fully up-to-date 360, and if I put a game disc into my 360, it starts the game. And if I'm in the middle of something else and want to play the game in the tray, it's the default (top-left) button on the dashboard home screen. I can't actually think of how much simpler they could possibly have made it for you.


I also can't stand Windows 8. It's a great touch interface, but it really ISN'T intuitive with a mouse and keyboard.

Everything is poorly organized and the interface seems more focused on aesthetics than organization.

The problem with it is that dragging a mouse and looking through those gobs of icons of "Every possible thing you've ever downloaded is here" is much harder than using a drop down box of the same.


Rynjin wrote:

I also can't stand Windows 8. It's a great touch interface, but it really ISN'T intuitive with a mouse and keyboard.

Everything is poorly organized and the interface seems more focused on aesthetics than organization.

The problem with it is that dragging a mouse and looking through those gobs of icons of "Every possible thing you've ever downloaded is here" is much harder than using a drop down box of the same.

PROTIP: Use the search function (the search charm is hidden off the right side of the screen). I have Windows 7 on my desktop machine, and I haven't clicked on the "All Programs" pull-over dialog on the start menu in months. Search is the way to go. What you should be using the Windows 8 tile UI for is organizing your most actively-used programs/links on the main screen (which would be just a hair faster than searching).

Notably, however, Windows 8.1 will see full release in a month or two and will restore a lot of the old-Windows user interface functionality for those who want to re-enable it.


Though I like a useful search function (my current computer is a Macbook Pro, and how easy it is to find things in the Finder is great. I had Win8 on a partition for a while and just HAD to swap back to Win 7 because I couldn't convince myself it was worth it), I have a big issue with seldom-used programs I can't quite remember the name of.

In that case, a drop down list, in my opinion, is easier to scan for the thing I'm looking for.

The favorites screen is great, but the rest of it is eugh.

But maybe 8.1 will be better. Microsoft is usually pretty good at fixing things like that.


GregH wrote:
Uzzy wrote:
Meanwhile, PC Gaming has gone from 'dead' to thriving.

Don't mean to jump into a conversation but after reading this, I just thought I'd add this:

PCs in decline

Now I know you were talking about PC "gaming" thriving, but how long can that last if the whole of the PC industry is in decline?

Personally we do all of our gaming on either consoles (mostly XBox 360 but we also have a Wii and PS2 kicking around) or handhelds (iPads, iPhones, DSes and 1 Vita). Our computers are for work or master storage of digital media.

Greg

You're looking for very specific implications based on an exceptionally broad statistic.

1) It's not broken down by market
2) It's not broken down by end user (business vs individual)
3) For individuals, it's not broken down by demographics

Steam is growing in the number of accounts, though it is also starting to branch out into other platforms.


Irontruth wrote:

You're looking for very specific implications based on an exceptionally broad statistic.

1) It's not broken down by market
2) It's not broken down by end user (business vs individual)
3) For individuals, it's not broken down by demographics

Steam is growing in the number of accounts, though it is also starting to branch out into other platforms.

I'm not actually looking for anything. I accepted that PC gaming is (currently) thriving and asked the question how long can that last if PC sales are on the decline, since my personal experience is a move away from PCs for games.

You (and others) are providing possible reasons for that. Thanks.

Greg

Sovereign Court

Scott, I think you'll like this


Hama wrote:
Scott, I think you'll like this

Given how many people have been clamoring for a return to the Xbox One shown off at E3 (there's a petition floating around with tens of thousands of signatures asking for this), and given that they're probably trying to be ultra-responsive in the wake of the blow-up, this makes sense.

Sovereign Court

I am still laughing. Even though the dude who writes this comic can sometimes be a selfish douche, he can make good comedy.

Just go forward from there.

Liberty's Edge

Hama wrote:

I am still laughing. Even though the dude who writes this comic can sometimes be a selfish douche, he can make good comedy.

Just go forward from there.

I question your grasp of the meaning of the words 'sometimes,, 'good', and 'comedy'.

Sovereign Court

Tastes differ?
I have enjoyed some of his comics greatly. Although most of his status updates tend to make me want to punch him in the throat.


Life is much easier when you learn to treat artists separately from their art. Judge the work on the work, and the person on the person, but letting the two mix is a recipe for treating a nice guy like a jerk, or for treating a good book/game/piece/movie like trash.

Sovereign Court

Yep, i agree. Although his artwork has improved over the years, he still remained a douche. My friend went to a con (i don't remember which one was it, he went to the U.S. on business and ended up having several days off so he went to a con), and he met him and the guy was pretty unpleasant. Given, it was late in the day, but still.

Shadow Lodge

1 person marked this as a favorite.
Scott Betts wrote:
Given how many people have been clamoring for a return to the Xbox One shown off at E3...

So...you and ???

Well, I kinda wish it would return, so that it's dismal and complete failure could serve as a beacon to any and all other companies not to try such horrible mistreatment of their customers.


Kthulhu wrote:
Scott Betts wrote:
Given how many people have been clamoring for a return to the Xbox One shown off at E3...
So...you and ???

Me, and more than 27,000 other gamers. It had an original goal of 15,000 signatures. Then its goal was increased to 25,000 signatures. Now they've upped it to 35,000 signatures, because people keep signing.

I realize that it's nice to imagine that your viewpoint is part of some universal consensus, but it's not. A lot of people understood what Microsoft was trying to create, and were actually pretty excited about the idea. It just wasn't enough to drown out the angry internet horde.


I think that mircosoft was so into getting money that they forgot what xbox was i mean they add so many things but all we wanted was to play games with friends and family. Not that every button and thing we do sucks money out of ower bank accounts. I mean if i wanted trade games i have to play for a fee thats pretty much the cost of that game when i can just buy
a new copy. That system compelety blows. I mean its easy get the disk put it in and play it thats it. Did you see how many people hardcore games where going to switch to sony? Thats when they said to them self that we missed up.


Scott Betts wrote:
Kthulhu wrote:
Scott Betts wrote:
Given how many people have been clamoring for a return to the Xbox One shown off at E3...
So...you and ???

Me, and more than 27,000 other gamers. It had an original goal of 15,000 signatures. Then its goal was increased to 25,000 signatures. Now they've upped it to 35,000 signatures, because people keep signing.

I realize that it's nice to imagine that your viewpoint is part of some universal consensus, but it's not. A lot of people understood what Microsoft was trying to create, and were actually pretty excited about the idea. It just wasn't enough to drown out the angry internet horde.

Thats so true people were outraged


AwesomeComicsProductions wrote:
but all we wanted was to play games with friends and family.

If all you want to do is play games with friends and family, there are plenty of consoles that do that already. A lot of them are very cheap. Some of them will even play games that are coming out right now.

A lot of us want that, but we want more than that. We want online integration. We want media services. We want novel control features like motion and voice.

Quote:
I think that mircosoft was so into getting money that they forgot what xbox was i mean they add so many things but all we wanted was to play games with friends and family. Not that every button and thing we do sucks money out of ower bank accounts.

I'm not even sure what this means. Or what you think it means.


That a lot of the features they were originally trying to integrate looked like a blatant cash grab to me and many others.


Rynjin wrote:
That a lot of the features they were originally trying to integrate looked like a blatant cash grab to me and many others.

It's pretty hard to make that argument in light of the fact that one of their announced features (one that got so little attention from the people railing against the Xbox One, oddly) was the ability to share all of your digital content with up to ten other people, including while you're actively using it, on any machine.

In other words, it only looks like a cash grab if you're not paying attention.


1 good feature doesn't really negate 3-4 bad ones, just mitigates the impact somewhat.


Rynjin wrote:
1 good feature doesn't really negate 3-4 bad ones,

Of course it does. Let's say that your concerns are: restrictions on used games, restrictions on trading, and the fact that the Kinect sensor has to be plugged in for the console to operate.

By letting you openly share your games with your friends, online, without losing access to that content yourself, they're negating the need to trade games completely (at least, for the vast majority of people). This also all but negates the need to purchase used games - chances are one of your friends will have the game, and as long as you're on their "family" list you'll have access to it.

So it negates two things that you don't like. And the third complaint is dumb and you should feel bad about complaining about it, so I'm just going to pretend it negates that one, too.

(And, of course, all of this ignores the fact that trading and used games still exist, just in a form altered for a digital ecosystem rather than physical.)

You can't say "One good feature doesn't outweigh four bad ones!" when that one good feature is specifically designed to address all of those concerns and be awesome on top of that. But you, and those like you, complained very loudly about something you apparently didn't understand very well, and as a result the rest of us are, once more, left with no choice but to deal with an outdated, inconvenient shared-content paradigm that we didn't use much to begin with, rather than a forward-thinking, all-digital online shared-content system that would have been kind of incredible. I don't begrudge Microsoft their decision to reverse their course - rabid gamers effectively held a gun to their console division's head; what choice did they have? But once again gamers prove that they are deserving of nearly all the derision they, as a community, receive.


Don't lead in with this "Oh you just don't understand!" nonsense again.

Someone can have a differing opinion from yours without having a lesser understanding just fine.

Yes, that feature is nice. Very nice, in fact.

However, that still doesn't outweigh the fact that trading and used games would not have/will not (if they re-implement these things) have existed in any real, viable sense.

They confirmed that such a thing would be a one-time deal, making used game sales essentially more of a gift or single re-purchase by another person, which is not the same thing.

Requiring periodic internet connectivity was a terrible idea with little advantage to the consumer. Online features are nice, online requirement is not, and requiring it for offline only actions is stupid.

Kinect being always on is a small downside. One I find to be dumb, but not to a huge detriment.

And as more of an "all in my head" sort of thing, having the game in that circle just isn't the same as having and/or owning the disc. That one's more of a personal complaint though.

So, 2 large downsides (in my eyes) and one very small one, with one pretty good upside.

And I'd say a community that bends over and lets a company implement policies they think are wrong or bad is a much worse one than one that will speak up about said features.


Scott Betts wrote:


Me, and more than 27,000 other gamers. It had an original goal of 15,000 signatures. Then its goal was increased to 25,000 signatures. Now they've upped it to 35,000 signatures, because people keep signing.

I realize that it's nice to imagine that your viewpoint is part of some universal consensus, but it's not. A lot of people understood what Microsoft was trying to create, and were actually pretty excited about the idea. It just wasn't enough to drown out the angry internet horde.

Oddly enough Kaspersky detected your petition site as a phishing page by heuristic analysis :) Phishing or no, online petitions aren't exactly the pinnacle of scientific accuracy (re trolling, authenticity of signatures, possible repetition) or even a reasonable gage of potential customer feelings on an issue. That and 27,000 is, lets face it, a drop in the bucket to the millions of connected, often all to opinionated, masses currently on x-box live. If you took a poll on x-box live you might have an accurate gage of the customer base opinion.

Sovereign Court

Scott Betts wrote:
Kthulhu wrote:
Scott Betts wrote:
Given how many people have been clamoring for a return to the Xbox One shown off at E3...
So...you and ???

Me, and more than 27,000 other gamers. It had an original goal of 15,000 signatures. Then its goal was increased to 25,000 signatures. Now they've upped it to 35,000 signatures, because people keep signing.

I realize that it's nice to imagine that your viewpoint is part of some universal consensus, but it's not. A lot of people understood what Microsoft was trying to create, and were actually pretty excited about the idea. It just wasn't enough to drown out the angry internet horde.

I love the fact that everyone who disagrees with you is a part of the 'angry internet horde'...


Rynjin wrote:

Don't lead in with this "Oh you just don't understand!" nonsense again.

Someone can have a differing opinion from yours without having a lesser understanding just fine.

They can, but this thread has demonstrated that most of those strongly opposed to the original Xbox One policies really didn't understand them.

Quote:

Yes, that feature is nice. Very nice, in fact.

However, that still doesn't outweigh the fact that trading and used games would not have/will not (if they re-implement these things) have existed in any real, viable sense.

The idea of trading digital content is outdated. Sharing it is simply better. And used games is similarly nonsensical - it takes the concept of transferring ownership of a devalued good to someone who would not have purchased it in its full-value form and tries to apply that concept to something which, by definition, cannot be functionally devalued.

Quote:
They confirmed that such a thing would be a one-time deal, making used game sales essentially more of a gift or single re-purchase by another person, which is not the same thing.

Which isn't important, because the sharing ecosystem replaces the trade/used system, and is straight-up better in nearly every conceivable way.

Quote:
Requiring periodic internet connectivity was a terrible idea with little advantage to the consumer. Online features are nice, online requirement is not, and requiring it for offline only actions is stupid.

The online requirement was what made the sharing system feasible. Maybe they'll figure out a way to get around it without the requirement in place, but as described the sharing system relied pretty heavily on it.

Quote:
And as more of an "all in my head" sort of thing, having the game in that circle just isn't the same as having and/or owning the disc. That one's more of a personal complaint though.

Yeah, the problem is when your hang-ups about literal ownership start influencing policy in such a way that awesome features are canned to appease you.

Quote:
And I'd say a community that bends over and lets a company implement policies they think are wrong or bad is a much worse one than one that will speak up about said features.

A community that busts out the torches and pitchforks before they have any idea what is being proposed (and doesn't bother to put them away once it's been clarified) deserves everything it gets.

If what was being proposed was awful, I'd be right there with you. But what was actually planned was frankly incredible, and a huge leap forward for gaming. Now it's not happening, we're stuck with the Blockbuster Video ecosystem in an era where every other entertainment mode has moved onto the post-Netflix stage (including PC games!), and we'll be lucky if any console manufacturer decides to try anything remotely similar in the next decade. Who could blame them for shying away from a digital content-sharing ecosystem in the future after what happened to Microsoft?


R_Chance wrote:
Phishing or no, online petitions aren't exactly the pinnacle of scientific accuracy (re trolling, authenticity of signatures, possible repetition) or even a reasonable gage of potential customer feelings on an issue.

Petitions were trotted out by the anti-Microsoft crowd as soon as their policies were announced, and were held up as evidence of how unpopular those policies were (along with similarly "scientific" measures, like the results of an IGN.com poll). I didn't see any of you disclaiming those petitions then.

Regardless, the only reason I mentioned the petition was to show that there actually is support for what Microsoft was planning, contrary to what Kthulhu wants to believe. Whether a couple thousand of those signatures are illegitimate isn't important.


Hama wrote:
I love the fact that everyone who disagrees with you is a part of the 'angry internet horde'...

Says the guy who told us that Angry Joe's stuporific, expletive-filled rant on the Xbox One summed up your thoughts perfectly.

But no, not everyone. Just the ones who were angry, and were on the internet. Feel free to opt out of that group! Ditching Angry Joe as your video game spirit animal would be a good start.

Liberty's Edge

Except that no one outside Microsoft knows what exact form this will take. Considering their track record (see Technet's destruction) and the incredible unlikelihood of MS convincing publishers to give up 10 sales I think you're being overly optimistic. The extended trial model described in the admittedly unverified pastebin rant seems far more likely then the free sharing you believe it to have been.

1,351 to 1,400 of 1,540 << first < prev | 21 | 22 | 23 | 24 | 25 | 26 | 27 | 28 | 29 | 30 | 31 | next > last >>
Community / Forums / Gamer Life / Entertainment / Video Games / Xbox one is coming All Messageboards