-Pyromaniac-
Member
because people think companies hate money. Microsoft won't pay the amount necessary to counteract the loss of sales from the other console.how come?
because people think companies hate money. Microsoft won't pay the amount necessary to counteract the loss of sales from the other console.how come?
because people think companies hate money. Microsoft won't pay the amount necessary to counteract the loss of sales from the other console.
If publishers are smart they will have online verification on install. (like steam)
I don't see this being a burden, if they opt for always online though they need a kick in the balls.
XBLA has been rebranded, "Xbox Zone".
You can now 'Be in the zone, with Xbox'.
? That wasn't about moneyhats. It was about publishers going with MS because they have an easy way to implement DRM, thus publishers don't have to worry about used games. I don't have an opinion on whether or not pubs would make more money on one closed, new games only platform vs. 2 platforms where one supports used games. I would assume the 2 platform choice would still be more lucrative but I'm not a business man.
Under Microsoft's current guidelines, which may still be changed, the decision of whether a game will require an internet connection to work and if that is a one-time authentication or a constant connection, will be left up to individual publishers.
Polygon has gotten a pretty negative reputation, largely because of Aegis and his..."antics". But they were smart enough to cover for themselves:
They are, with VG leaks i believe the only 2 sites that have not claimed outright always online requirement for the next Xbox. EDGE seemed pretty damn certain of their information, they unlike Polygon, left nothing to interpretation, no "safe nets" to fall back up. The only thing EDGE was wrong about was the PS4 ram, as they reported 4 instead of 8.
Either they got legitimate sources or are simply stirring the pot by reporting the opposite of what almost everyone else has been reporting on
Does not matter, as we will know the truth soon enough.
Polygon has gotten a pretty negative reputation
The way the article says that these different options are supported and that they now have greater control than before seems to indicate that Microsoft is providing and supporting the framework for options that was not there before.
In which case, I interpret the difference between Microsoft and Sony to be something like:
If true, then a publisher may not want to put all the effort into setting it up themselves on PS4, since now there is one less console to justify that effort and cost. Yet with it being easier to do on the next Xbox, they still might go ahead and use Microsoft's solution there.
Polygon has gotten a pretty negative reputation, largely because of Aegis and his..."antics". But they were smart enough to cover for themselves:
They are, with VG leaks i believe the only 2 sites that have not claimed outright always online requirement for the next Xbox. EDGE seemed pretty damn certain of their information, they unlike Polygon, left nothing to interpretation, no "safe nets" to fall back up. The only thing EDGE was wrong about was the PS4 ram, as they reported 4 instead of 8.
Either they got legitimate sources or are simply stirring the pot by reporting the opposite of what almost everyone else has been reporting on
Does not matter, as we will know the truth soon enough.
most of this rumors are BS. there is no "source". it's the site, the editor(s) that come up with it just to get hits. didn't former 1up guys admit that they did that crap with their "rumor" section? It's really easy to make up stories if you are one of this bigger sites, and even if they miss, who cares people are fast to forger. and if they guess right (most of the time since rumor is based on someone elses rumor or common sense) they become "legit" with "history".
While somone is laughing their ass off.
Under Microsoft's current guidelines, which may still be changed
Then you must not have heard about Mandala (Amiga).
Another reason for their negative rep? ... they cut a pretty big cheque from Microsoft when they started up. Whether that adds more credibility, because they're in someone's pocket, or less... because they're in someone's pocket, who can say?
I felt it gives them more credibility in this instance. MS paid them to be a mouthpiece so when I see MS news out of Polygon I feel like it should be accurate.
They are not going to have a system where a disc needs to be in the tray to play again. There will be some other form of validation
Oh really.
We have to compare... how much an exclusive game would sell as a new copy versus how much a game would sell on two platforms even with used games.
I'm personally guessing the difference is in favour of multi-platform somehow people think it'd go the other way though.
The achievements sound cool to me. Some will be stupid but I think it'd be neat to have special achievements for maybe playing every game from a developer or something like getting an A+ rank character in every Capcom fighter. That type of stuff sound cool to me. I'm sure there will be some dumb stuff, but I'll just skip that.
It'd also be cool to get achievements for other stuff. Zune is long dead, but me and a friend had one and one pretty cool thing about it is that you got Zune achievements for listening to music. Apps getting achievements could be fun too.
Worst comes to worst, you can totally ignore them.
Was it out of the kindness of their heart?
I thought it was for Halo 4 advertising?
Why to people think a game will always online on 1 platform then can offline play on other if both have choice?easier or not it doesn't really matter,if they want always online,every platform will,if not,every platform won't? That wasn't about moneyhats. It was about publishers going with MS because they have an easy way to implement DRM, thus publishers don't have to worry about used games. I don't have an opinion on whether or not pubs would make more money on one closed, new games only platform vs. 2 platforms where one supports used games. I would assume the 2 platform choice would still be more lucrative but I'm not a business man.
2.5 You can say,kotaku changed to "not sure" nowPolygon has gotten a pretty negative reputation, largely because of Aegis and his..."antics". But they were smart enough to cover for themselves:
They are, with VG leaks i believe the only 2 sites that have not claimed outright always online requirement for the next Xbox. EDGE seemed pretty damn certain of their information, they unlike Polygon, left nothing to interpretation, no "safe nets" to fall back up. The only thing EDGE was wrong about was the PS4 ram, as they reported 4 instead of 8.
Either they got legitimate sources or are simply stirring the pot by reporting the opposite of what almost everyone else has been reporting on
Does not matter, as we will know the truth soon enough.
With the next Xbox, developers and publishers will be able to add more achievements to a game after launch, without the need to add DLC. This is designed specifically to allow developers to tweak player behavior, perhaps urging players to check out specific areas of a game or get past a difficult spot. Next-gen achievements can also be tied to broader events, like a weekend challenge or a communal goal, like contributing a set number of kills to the bigger goal of 10,000 kills over one weekend. Companies can also create cross-title achievements, like awarding points for finishing the first chapter in two different and unrelated games published by the same company. Some of these bigger, cross-title, communal achievements will be a requirement for all titles.
My thoughts exactly. They can do some really interesting things, and the shit can just be avoided. I've never cared about getting every single achievement, but I like the achievement system for the most part.
Yeah I'm sure they specified, "This is Halo 4 money. Outside of that you can be objective."
So...it was for advertising Halo 4?
If they choose to be a MS leaning site, that's on them, but there's not much evidence to suggest that they are in the pockets of MS due to that ad money. I'm sure sites like IGN, etc also received handsome amounts for their advertising of Halo 4, so to single one out is a little ridiculous.
I'm sure sites get ad money from game companies. I believe Giantbomb had a Far Cry 3 ads on their site.
Exactly. I do concede that Polygon don't do themselves any favours with their MS leanings, but I find the idea of singling them out as being in the pockets of MS because of ad money a little silly.
Exactly. I do concede that Polygon don't do themselves any favours with their MS leanings, but I find the idea of singling them out as being in the pockets of MS because of ad money a little silly.
Especially given IGN are now essentially a Sony PR tool.
Even the Xbox podcast became a PS4 podcast after the PS4 reveal lol.
Polygon is the least reputable gaming publication in the industry. Even less so than "official" magazines and even less than Kotaku.
Exactly. I do concede that Polygon don't do themselves any favours with their MS leanings, but I find the idea of singling them out as being in the pockets of MS because of ad money a little silly.
A bit harsh there, I understand that most of the people on Gaf hate Polygon for whatever inane ass-backwards reason there is, but they run alot of good high quality editorials on the industry. People need to remember that pretty much all of the news sites pick sides on one thing or another and where one may be leaning towards Sony, another may be leaning towards Microsoft.There's no evidence that IGN is a Sony PR tool. A lot of NA sites were sickeningly pro Microsoft last generation. 1UP was the primary culprit before getting disbanded and Polygon filled their shoes. Just because the Xbox podcast discussed the PS4 that doesn't mean anything. Chances are, the Playstation podcast will, guess what, discuss the Durango unveil on their podcast. People are excited about next gen hardware--that's all. Polygon is the least reputable gaming publication in the industry. Even less so than "official" magazines and even less than Kotaku.
There's no evidence that IGN is a Sony PR tool. A lot of NA sites were sickeningly pro Microsoft last generation. 1UP was the primary culprit before getting disbanded and Polygon filled their shoes. Just because the Xbox podcast discussed the PS4 that doesn't mean anything. Chances are, the Playstation podcast will, guess what, discuss the Durango unveil on their podcast. People are excited about next gen hardware--that's all. Polygon is the least reputable gaming publication in the industry. Even less so than "official" magazines and even less than Kotaku.
No doubt 1UP were pro Microsoft. I'd say Eurogamer leans that way too.
But IGN, over the last few years, have basically become a bunch of Sony fanboys with a few of them forced to cover Xbox and Nintendo.
Mainly because the guys who weren't fanboys like Cassamasina are gone.
This is sad. These people cover games, not consoles.
This is sad. These people cover games, not consoles.
If the biggest news in gaming is the announcement of the PS4, then obviously the Xbox podcast is going to talk about that thing as well, and you'll see plenty of news coverage on the frontpage about it.
It's simply the stuff that's on people's mind, and stuff that everyone wants to read.
The Xbox announcement will be no different, depending on what MS has to show.
If you're not excited about the next-generation, you're in for a rough year when gaming websites are concerned.
Goes back to well before the PS4 reveal dude. The podcast thing was just an example.
I just stick to Kotaku AU now. They seem the most neutral and have the best layout.
Can you give me some examples of IGN being a Sony PR mouthpiece then?
Maybe it's the fact that Sony is still putting out big new IP's at the end of this generation instead of tapering of. There's actual new stuff to cover.
Sorry man. Its 11pm here and I'm on my phone.
The Uncharted 3 review is another example. I'd expect a "reputable" website not review a game like they're a forum fanboy.
Come on son, that game has what, 20+ perfect scores from websites all around.
All of those are Sony PR mouthpieces?
I mean, if the review is poorly written that's another thing, but the game achieved nearly unanimous praise from almost every corner of the internet.
When did I argue the score?
Read the review. Read the words. Its a PR release.
When did I argue the score?
Read the review. Read the words. Its a PR release.
Should be pointed out that IGN's Playstation team whilst generally fair reviewers are also insanely fanboyish in general comments/views. Its quite horrible to watch/read/listen to.
The head of their MS section attempted to have intercourse with a PS3 and Vita at a european convention too. Claiming to have fallen in love with them.
I would suggest ignoring the stuff you like/dislike instead of trying to force your opinion on them onto other people though. Thats just a waste of everyones discussion time.