Infinity Ward ops to show PS4 footage for COD IGN vids- a series first since MS deal?

Mar 15, 2013
134
0
0
Brooklyn, New York
Many people who love graphics would like to go the PC route, but it is usually the most expensive route. However, to get the best graphics on consoles you can go with the cheaper option of the two this time. This makes the situation a little different than just saying you would go to PC if you cared about graphics.

However, all of your other point for going Xbox One are valid. If Xbox One ends up doing poorly, you might even be better off for it. I say this because you can be damn well sure that Microsoft is going to start pulling out the stops(money hats) and forcing itself to think outside the box to get people back on their platform. Similar to how Sony handled this generation, but I don't think Microsoft is THAT far behind. When they do this, I will probably pick up an Xbox One.
AGREED...I feel like the PS3 launch was pretty brutal between the price point, poor launch lineup, cell architecture and weak playstation network that eventually led to the hacking incident. All of that led to the PS3 pulling out some amazing exclusives, awesome PS+ features and in the end matching the 360 in sales. This poor start for Microsoft will just mean a better future for consumers, this is why competition is so great.
 
Jun 23, 2010
4,346
0
0
For me personally, its all about the games. If I wanted the most powerful machine I would be a PC gamer. Xbox One launch titles look unbelievable so far, and I can't wait to see what future titles like Quantum Break and Halo 5 look like. I am buying an Xbox One because I love the XBL community and user interface, I love the controller and Microsoft's exclusives though not as plentiful as Sony's, are more appealing to me. We all know COD is probably the worst looking multiplatform next gen title, if the Xbox One isn't doing 1080p its because of optimization which is something that will get ironed out in the future. I just don't think its something to spend so much time going nuts over, and I really feel bad for Panello who seems like a nice guy who has to deal with all this pointless banter. Lets just wait for the game to come out, do you guys honestly think it will look that much different then the PS4 version? I am pretty sure the 360 version won't look much different from the PS4 version for that matter.
yes of course its about the games first and foremost...but lets not kid ourselves...there is a reason that we moved on from the PS2 (arguably the greatest console that we will ever see)...computational power does not just bring with it pretty graphics...but better AI, better animations, and many other things that can make games better...

ive always been a console gamer...never really got into PC gaming...but i am into video editing and such and always built myself powerful PC's (for the time)...i would like to build a gaming PC...but im truly a tech addict...and with the way PC hardware is always advancing i would want to buy every new GPU that comes out...and i used to do things like that...took me a long time to break that habit...so i dont want to go back down that road lol...

so i stick with consoles for gaming...and i want the best multiplatform (console) experience if im spending my money and there are options...

Yes, the Xbone's launch exclusives look great...but you can already see the compromises...900p Ryse...baked lighting Forza 5....they still look awesome (especially Ryse) but it frankly doesn't bode well for the future in my opinion...

if there is one thing Crytek can do, its graphics...same with Guerrilla Games....but Sony also has other studios that are arguably even better than GG at pushing poly's...im not sure MS possesses a first party studio that is going to outdo what Crytek is able to pull off...

i also think people that use Xbox Live as an argument for choosing the Xbone over the PS4 are going to be very surprised at what Sony offers this generation..
 
Nov 30, 2007
22,332
2
795
It is still possible for Microsoft to make this right. They can't do it on the technical end, but they can make up the difference with services and value proposition.

Right now gamers are having a hard time understanding why the device is $100 more than the PS4. Kinect seems useless in-game, graphically it is weaker, and the difference between xbox live and PSN is miniscule.

Add some value to the system. Throw in some downloadable games or provide a service to xbox one owners that is completely exclusive, without the need for yet another subscription.
Nintendo had by far the weakest hardware this gen, but it had an amazing value.
 
Jun 4, 2011
30,337
2
0
It is still possible for Microsoft to make this right. They can't do it on the technical end, but they can make up the difference with services and value proposition.

Right now gamers are having a hard time understanding why the device is $100 more than the PS4. Kinect seems useless in-game, graphically it is weaker, and the difference between xbox live and PSN is miniscule.

Add some value to the system. Throw in some downloadable games or provide a service to xbox one owners that is completely exclusive, without the need for yet another subscription.
Nintendo had by far the weakest hardware this gen, but it had an amazing value.
Better yet, just lower the price.
 
Jun 9, 2012
1,085
0
0
New Zealand
Ok, I'm gonna be real with everyone as I came to this conclusion 2 days ago when the shit hit the fan about GHOST running like crap on both systems.



The reason's minus poor tools/ESRAM limits that the xbox looking crappy along with the possibly higher res'd PS4, is because of bad game/Engine optimization.

Let's take a look at this Big turd of unoptimized mess on pc:
Specs according to Steam;




Those are Minimum specs! 6GB of freaking RAM for a old ass engine with modifications?
40GB of HD space for a shooter?
GTS 450, or HD 5870 for GPU? Those can run most demanding games at medium settings, that look 2-3x better than GHOSTS.

Look at previous entry which was actually Optimized correctly:

Black Ops 2:
Steam;




The difference is fucking Staggering isn't it? AND Black Ops 2 ran DX 11, just doesn't say that in Minimum spec page, main page discloses that information.

I am going to call this one more on Activision, than Microsoft, even though we have proof of the down sampled resolutions on most of their games.

Just my explanation, Don't flame me!


If this has already been brought to light, let me know.

When you really think about it the spec jump between BLOPS2 and Ghosts isn't really that big considering they went for DX11 and 64-bit only on Ghosts.

CPU the same
RAM went from 4GB (for 64-Bit) to 6GB probably the biggest spec jump but not exactly mind blowing considering that they probably designed the PC version to be the basis for their next gen versions and they both have 8GB RAM (shared and with some reserved for OS but still).
GPU well they had to recommend a DX11 GPU and the 450 is actually barely faster than the 8800 as seen here http://www.techpowerup.com/reviews/Axle/GeForce_GTS_450_OC/9.html (9800 is a rebadged 8800). I will blame the 5870 recommendation on it being a Nvidia backed title as it is technically twice as powerful as the 450 lol.


I expect the specs to jump up again next year when Treyarch launch their title.
 
May 31, 2013
23,628
0
0
So how long until Microsoft allows footage of all launch games to be shown? Maybe next Friday with the Battlefield 4 tournament thing they're doing? At this point, I just want to see the games running.
Likely not until launch when both versions are in the wild

Reviewers are almost always given the same version of a game (PS or XB) so they can't determine the difference
 
Nov 30, 2007
22,332
2
795
Better yet, just lower the price.
I think the only way to do that is to drop kinect. If they drop kinect, then it will be a direct comparison to the PS4. Direct comparisons to the PS4 at $399 just don't work well for the xbox one. So unless they can price the kinectless xbox one at $349, it's not worth it.

I think they are better off with a value bundled $499 model.
 
Ok, I'm gonna be real with everyone as I came to this conclusion 2 days ago when the shit hit the fan about GHOST running like crap on both systems.



The reason's minus poor tools/ESRAM limits that the xbox looking crappy along with the possibly higher res'd PS4, is because of bad game/Engine optimization.

Let's take a look at this Big turd of unoptimized mess on pc:
Specs according to Steam;




Those are Minimum specs! 6GB of freaking RAM for a old ass engine with modifications?
40GB of HD space for a shooter?
GTS 450, or HD 5870 for GPU? Those can run most demanding games at medium settings, that look 2-3x better than GHOSTS.

Look at previous entry which was actually Optimized correctly:

Black Ops 2:
Steam;




The difference is fucking Staggering isn't it? AND Black Ops 2 ran DX 11, just doesn't say that in Minimum spec page, main page discloses that information.

I am going to call this one more on Activision, than Microsoft, even though we have proof of the down sampled resolutions on most of their games.

Just my explanation, Don't flame me!


If this has already been brought to light, let me know.

While you are right that the cod engine is a mess these days that doesn't explain other games. We are going to be seeing resolution differences in far more games than just Ghosts.


That said, the xbox one is capable of running any of these games at 1080p/60fps (as is the ps4). The problem with launch titles is that they are cross gen so resources are split up and devs don't get final hardware until very late. So performance suffers.


The xbox one will get better looking as time goes on. The problem for it is that so will the ps4.

ESRAM is a problem for devs. It's not nearly the problem that the cell was for devs in the ps3... and they were able to eventually adapt to that. There's some differences there, as the ps3 was the more powerful machine so as devs learned it they made big gains (see: uncharted 1 vs uncharted 2). The xbox one is more powerful than what their launch lineup is going to make it seem like... but it just isn't as powerful as the ps4.

I'm speaking just of power btw. The tv shit and kinect shit and some exclusives could take over the world and the xbox will sell 200 million units and the ps4 will sell 20. That's all to be determined. But when we are talking just about the power of the machine the xbox comes up short. So did their pre-launch dev tools, evidently.
 
May 31, 2013
23,628
0
0
Interesting. Unless the devs are working 20 hours shifts for a day 1 patch on the Xbone... it's pretty much guaranteed to be less than 1080p.
Well it'll be less than 1080p out of the box but yeah even if a patch is coming it's very unlikely to be a day one

I could see a very very small chance of a day 1 patch for XB1 that allows 900p but that would still require a massive crunch by IW
 
Jun 9, 2013
119
0
0
It's not overblown at all

The story here... again is that the console that cost less outperforms the other. In every console generation, there has been one console that has the power advantage. Put that advantage has come with a price. And that price has always been a disadvantage, cancelling the power advantage mostly.

Sony has the power and price advantage.

The Cell was a mistake. ESRAM is a mistake too.

They sacrificed the insidey parts (lol) of the Xbox One to force the Kinect. That was a mistake.

And you can say "let the games do the talking" - translation Have You Seen Titanfall.

I did see Titanfall. I seen Titanfall for Xbox One AND Xbox 360 and PC.

You don't need a $500 console to play Titanfall, Fantasy Football, or to watch TV. And why spend more to play games when you can spend less and have as good or better looking games. This wouldn't be an issue if Xbox One cost $350

Microsoft is Sony back in 2006. They bet on Kinect being the next ipad or something. Mistake
 
Aug 18, 2013
11,594
0
0
Anybody think this was a COD dev that said this back in June?

http://www.forbes.com/sites/johngaudiosi/2013/06/15/sony-playstation-4-launch-edition-already-sold-out-at-amazon/



The way that dev singled out Ghost's makes me think it might have been. And it goes right along with what's happening right now.
Reading that article I was reminded of the claims that MS was using PC's and not dev kits at E3. Most of the games journalists downplayed the significance at the time.
 
Apr 9, 2012
20,735
2
0
Interesting. Unless the devs are working 20 hours shifts for a day 1 patch on the Xbone... it's pretty much guaranteed to be less than 1080p.
I mean they have just under 4 weeks before its available publicly so they have time but I bet they would rather have those hours going into DLC rather than optimizing the game further.
 

Pwn

Member
Jan 23, 2010
246
0
0
It is still possible for Microsoft to make this right. They can't do it on the technical end, but they can make up the difference with services and value proposition.

Right now gamers are having a hard time understanding why the device is $100 more than the PS4. Kinect seems useless in-game, graphically it is weaker, and the difference between xbox live and PSN is miniscule.

Add some value to the system. Throw in some downloadable games or provide a service to xbox one owners that is completely exclusive, without the need for yet another subscription.
Nintendo had by far the weakest hardware this gen, but it had an amazing value.
Maybe American gamers like to pay more for less because of the brand loyalty?
 
Aug 18, 2013
11,594
0
0
So Microsoft want Activision to deliver the 'bad news' that the game is 720p and not themselves?

I can't get my head around that Sony's head of 3rd party relations can state that it is 1080p whilst Microsoft simply don't know or don't want to say. They should have dispelled this rumour days ago and finished the matter, everyday it's getting more and more believable.
Adam Boyes confirming 1080p puts MS/Activision in a bad position. They have to confirm something before launch

So who runs 3rd party relations for Xbox?

I understand the way the game is played, but at the same time these are products that you can put money down for purchase right now. I think it is fair enough to be able to ask a question about technical details.
Yup. People saying most people don't care but this is COD. I'm sure people who preordered an XB1 and are planning on buying COD would like to know before they spend $500. 720p vs 1080p is a big difference
 
May 26, 2009
820
0
0
Yep, I notice nobody went bitching at Kaz Hirai when Bayonetta ran like a dog on PS3 or Orange box was painful on Ps3.
Im not trying to play devils advocate or defend anyone but those two were bad ports handled by second hand studios as far as I remember (some EA team doing the Orange box port and one from Sega doing Bayonetta). Just saying there are way better examples of PS3 versions with awful permormance :p.
 
Nov 13, 2011
16,595
0
0
The person to bitch to would have been crazy Ken - if one wanted to complain about the exotic system architecture. But he had already been kicked upstairs into a position of irrelevance by the time The Orange Box and Bayonetta were released.

Mattrick, who presumably oversaw the XB1 development, is already gone too. Although, the overarching business goals that drove the design are still in place.
 
Jul 24, 2013
301
0
0
Adam Boyes confirming 1080p puts MS/Activision in a bad position. They have to confirm something before launch



Yup. People saying most people don't care but this is COD. I'm sure people who preordered an XB1 and are planning on buying COD would like to know before they spend $500. 720p vs 1080p is a big difference
Yeah, the a lot of the people saying they don't care are being disingenuous. They are worried about all the 720p's being thrown around.
 
Jun 27, 2007
12,158
0
920
Anybody think this was a COD dev that said this back in June?

http://www.forbes.com/sites/johngaudiosi/2013/06/15/sony-playstation-4-launch-edition-already-sold-out-at-amazon/



The way that dev singled out Ghost's makes me think it might have been. And it goes right along with what's happening right now.
yeah I think you are on to something. I mean back then if someone suggested that COD Ghost, with MS's marketing deal, was going to look better on the PS4...everyone would've laughed it off...like I'm sure some some did when they first read that news.

so for him to single it out, like you stated...he would have had to be in the know. Again, back then no one would've guessed that game...or would've wanted to publicly guess that game...lol.
 
Oct 31, 2009
14,209
0
680
Albert, I understand you can't be told everything. I also understand your friend's silence heavily indicates bad news for the Xbox One.

But you need to understand this. For me, this was it. If the xbox one can't run CoD at 1080p with ease, I can't consciously invest more money in the system your company is putting out.

So I don't know if you take user feedback seriously at all, but feel free to pass on that this news made a loyal customer (bought the original xbox and Xbox 360 on day 1, has been a live subscriber since 2 months after the service launched, and owns over 150 XBLA games) give up on your system.

And has convinced his close friends to be done with Xbox too.


Yeah exactly. Adam Boyse confirming 1080/60 has really backed MS into a corner.
can someone link me where boyes confirmed 1080/60 for ghosts? i must've missed it.

PS4 SKU has been stated as native 1080p60 by Adam Boyes.

Microsoft and Activision have yet to definitively state the resolution of the Xbox One SKU.

famousmortimer says that multiple sources are now confirming to him that it's 720p right now, but they're trying to get the resolution up.
why would they spend so much effort trying to get resolution up if it will be upscaled anyways? is it really worth the time/money from activision?
 
Aug 31, 2013
4,962
0
0
So keep that in mind...it's not fair to say "such and such PC card cannot do 1080p so obviously the same caliber of chip in XboxOne shouldn't be able to do it" ..that is a bit of non-sense bro
Comparing it to the equivalent PC card is nonsense, but not for the reason you think.

The equivalent PC card will be backed by GDDR5, but the GPU in the XBone isn't. I'd imagine XBone's performance will be substantially lower than you'd expect from the equivalent PC GPU, even after devs come to grips with the eSRAM. (Hint: There's a reason why GPUs have 2GB+ of fast memory; if 32MB was plenty, that's what they'd use.)

If there's ever been a game where eye-candy doesn't matter it is this one. Will it play fast and smooth on both systems? Yes, most likely. And that's all that matters. Once both systems are optimized the games will look great, and likely a bit better on the PS4. I think the overreaction here is kinda silly but fun to read...
Doesn't the game run smoothly on the Gen7 systems? If eye candy isn't important to you — which is certainly a valid position to take — then why bother upgrading to Gen8 at all? If you feel eye candy isn't "important," but is a nice enough bonus to justify a one-time expenditure of a few hundred bucks — also a valid position — then why pay more to get less of it, especially when doing so locks you in to paying more for multiplayer and/or paying for services which are otherwise free?
 
Nov 13, 2011
16,595
0
0
why would they spend so much effort trying to get resolution up if it will be upscaled anyways? is it really worth the time/money from activision?
Upscaling = blur.

It really should be quite easily noticeable if something isn't native resolution. One may not be able to discern the exact resolution obviously.
1080p is more than twice the number of pixels as 720p; you're essentially interpolating to create those million pixels on a 1080p display.

Is it worth the time and money? I don't know, that would presumably depend on whatever arrangements Activision and Microsoft have. It's known they have a co-marketing deal and content exclusivity deal. It may not be a good look if the PS4 version is this much better.

I can imagine Infinity Ward crunching to get it up to scratch under directive from on high.
 
Oct 27, 2004
103,739
3
0
34
Nowhere, PA
That was a straight power move. They didn't have to say that but they know what's going on. They threw a shot at the competition while making it look like they were only commenting on their own business...that's gangsta!
Ustream of the Sony Playstation conference in Brazil today.
Sony really is on their game, strategically. They're so connected to what's going on in the industry they were able to immediately grasp the advantage revealing this would give them and quickly have that turn around time. When it was just a huge GAF topic for like two days prior!

That's why I hope Microsoft can land on their feet. Sony is playing hard right now, real hard. And I want competition, I don't think companies turn into good companies when they're alone. Usually they begin to get arrogant and abusive to consumers after a set amount of time at the top.
 
Oct 19, 2010
15,967
0
0
So how long until Microsoft allows footage of all launch games to be shown? Maybe next Friday with the Battlefield 4 tournament thing they're doing? At this point, I just want to see the games running.
They've already been showing BF4 on XB1, and it also runs at 720p. I just played it myself last weekend at an event. I was not impressed.
 
Jun 6, 2013
708
0
0
Florida
Sony really is on their game, strategically. They're so connected to what's going on in the industry they were able to immediately grasp the advantage revealing this would give them and quickly have that turn around time. When it was just a huge GAF topic for like two days prior!

That's why I hope Microsoft can land on their feet. Sony is playing hard right now, real hard. And I want competition, I don't think companies turn into good companies when they're alone. Usually they begin to get arrogant and abusive to consumers after a set amount of time at the top.
I want competition as well but at the same time how do you justify rewarding Microsoft for all they have done .

Look at Sony has released (and at a loss) and then realize that they weren't charging an online fee for the last 5 years and that PS3 just became profitable in the last couple years.

On the other hand Microsoft has been charging live fee , initially released with all kinds of DRM, released with Kinect (even though most don't want it) and aren't even willing to take an initial loss at all.

At the beginning of the year I was firmly in the MS camp, their arrogance has driven me (gladly) to my first Sony console. So as much as I like competition, I can not see supporting them at all at this point .
 

Papacheeks

Junior Member
Jan 30, 2013
5,353
2
325
Watertown, NY
When you really think about it the spec jump between BLOPS2 and Ghosts isn't really that big considering they went for DX11 and 64-bit only on Ghosts.

CPU the same
RAM went from 4GB (for 64-Bit) to 6GB probably the biggest spec jump but not exactly mind blowing considering that they probably designed the PC version to be the basis for their next gen versions and they both have 8GB RAM (shared and with some reserved for OS but still).
GPU well they had to recommend a DX11 GPU and the 450 is actually barely faster than the 8800 as seen here http://www.techpowerup.com/reviews/Axle/GeForce_GTS_450_OC/9.html (9800 is a rebadged 8800). I will blame the 5870 recommendation on it being a Nvidia backed title as it is technically twice as powerful as the 450 lol.


I expect the specs to jump up again next year when Treyarch launch their title.

Did you read my post? I said if you go to Black Ops 2 info page it states Direct x11 functions for pc.

So the difference I think is higher res, higher poly count models in single player, along with rendered HD cutscenes using the "Updated" engine.

Shows you how un-optimized the game engine is.

That's what i was referring too.

Also take a look at BF4 for PC requirements are lower than Ghosts and that game looks 10 times better, so there for wouldn't the Minimum be much higher than Ghosts?

To your other point, Treyarch are talented, they can optimize, then learned their lesson from Blops 1.

They got me back into COD with Black Ops 1 and 2.

Shows you how shit this new call of duty is.
 

Papacheeks

Junior Member
Jan 30, 2013
5,353
2
325
Watertown, NY
While you are right that the cod engine is a mess these days that doesn't explain other games. We are going to be seeing resolution differences in far more games than just Ghosts.


That said, the xbox one is capable of running any of these games at 1080p/60fps (as is the ps4). The problem with launch titles is that they are cross gen so resources are split up and devs don't get final hardware until very late. So performance suffers.


The xbox one will get better looking as time goes on. The problem for it is that so will the ps4.

ESRAM is a problem for devs. It's not nearly the problem that the cell was for devs in the ps3... and they were able to eventually adapt to that. There's some differences there, as the ps3 was the more powerful machine so as devs learned it they made big gains (see: uncharted 1 vs uncharted 2). The xbox one is more powerful than what their launch lineup is going to make it seem like... but it just isn't as powerful as the ps4.

I'm speaking just of power btw. The tv shit and kinect shit and some exclusives could take over the world and the xbox will sell 200 million units and the ps4 will sell 20. That's all to be determined. But when we are talking just about the power of the machine the xbox comes up short. So did their pre-launch dev tools, evidently.

Oh I know, I am in all the forums about the downsampled Xbox one versions on multiplat games. I was just saying with the evidence about COD:ghost this is one instance where it's not all on the lacking of MS.

I mean part of it is, especially after Adam Boyes just confirmed PS4 Native 1080p 60fps for Ghosts.

Which shows the power difference, and gap of developer tool maturity between xbone/ps4. But that IGN stream of ghosts regardless looked like pure hot garbage.

Which was to me leaning towards the Infinity ward engine problem more than consoles in general, in this instance.
 
Apr 8, 2005
356
0
0
Would this be the first console game ever patched to go from 720p -> 1080p?
The only time in console history that I can recall a game being patched after launch to improve resolution was Ghostbusters on PS3. The resolution was upped from 540p to 576p.

To go from 720p --> 1080p, otoh, would be a quantum leap by comparison. Unless 720p was just a "placeholder" resolution of sorts for Infinity Ward while they get 1080p up-and-running, I don't think there's a chance of such an upgrade. Aiming for 900p would be more feasible (but yet still unlikely).
 
Apr 8, 2005
356
0
0
Post process AA doesn't dramatically increase framebuffer memory consumption.

I'd expect most XB1 titles to have FXAA at the least. But who knows given the horrible aliasing in even the PS4 version of COD.
The terrible aliasing you see is the terrible compression and/or scaling of IGN's flash video. If the PS4 version truly is native 1080p, then there's no way in hell all those jaggies are present in the game itself. It's most likely the poor quality of the video.

Burnout Paradise got a 1080i mode on the PS3 back when not all TVs could handle 720p but could handle 1080i instead.
But yeah, it's pretty rare.
You're right. I was thinking Burnout: Paradise's 1080 mode came before launch (much like how Killzone 2 and Uncharted's 1080 modes came before launch). However, Burnout was patched on PS3 to run at 960x1080, not true 1080p (1920x1080). Going from 1280x720 to 960x1080 means more horizontal lines, but fewer vertical lines. It was a bump in total pixels rendered, but not a dramatic one.
 
Jun 28, 2013
7,278
0
0
Nobody at MS will comment on this. Most people don’t know. This is Activision’s product, and it’s completely up to them on how/when they want to show this product, why they choose to roll-out their game in a certain way, and what platforms they choose to show on.
Activision seems comfortable with Boyes commenting on his system. Wonder why they won't let you comment on yours?
 
May 22, 2012
756
0
0
So, I watched the videos on IGN in 1080p and ... yeah... I don't see why anyone cares what each console will run this at.

It seriously looks about the same to me as BLOPS2 WiiU.

Maybe I just don't see the bling.
 
May 13, 2013
8,004
72
405
USA
So, I watched the videos on IGN in 1080p and ... yeah... I don't see why anyone cares what each console will run this at.

It seriously looks about the same to me as BLOPS2 WiiU.

Maybe I just don't see the bling.
Did know notice how awful CoD looks even in 1080p? If XBone can't run that game in 1080, then it is seriously weak
 
Oct 27, 2004
103,739
3
0
34
Nowhere, PA
I want competition as well but at the same time how do you justify rewarding Microsoft for all they have done .

Look at Sony has released (and at a loss) and then realize that they weren't charging an online fee for the last 5 years and that PS3 just became profitable in the last couple years.

On the other hand Microsoft has been charging live fee , initially released with all kinds of DRM, released with Kinect (even though most don't want it) and aren't even willing to take an initial loss at all.

At the beginning of the year I was firmly in the MS camp, their arrogance has driven me (gladly) to my first Sony console. So as much as I like competition, I can not see supporting them at all at this point .
I'm not suggesting "rewarding" them. I am simply saying that I hope however much damage they to take from all the messes since the start of this year, I hope it is not so much that they cannot recover and be competitive. As long as they stay away from my consumer rights, I don't have a problem with them existing whatsoever and in fact have loved many products on their systems (360 was my primary console of choice by a loooooong shot.)
 
Nov 26, 2009
11,734
0
0
Los Angeles
I'm not suggesting "rewarding" them. I am simply saying that I hope however much damage they to take from all the messes since the start of this year, I hope it is not so much that they cannot recover and be competitive. As long as they stay away from my consumer rights, I don't have a problem with them existing whatsoever and in fact have loved many products on their systems (360 was my primary console of choice by a loooooong shot.)
Totally understand what you are saying. I hope they start by announcing that all apps that are free elsewhere get removed from the paywall and announcing that the Xbox Gold free games thing will begin day one on Xbox One. I think that would do a lot to show that they are seriously about making it up to the consumer. At the moment, they don't really seem to care about competing. Rather they seem content with just resting on their laurels of having the best selling console in the US last generation.

Having cancelled my PS4 and looking at probably getting one of the consoles mid next year, doing the above would make the decision on which to get much tougher. As of right now it's 100% PS4 again, but just not now.
 
May 31, 2013
23,628
0
0
Totally understand what you are saying. I hope they start by announcing that all apps that are free elsewhere get removed from the paywall and announcing that the Xbox Gold free games thing will begin day one on Xbox One. I think that would do a lot to show that they are seriously about making it up to the consumer. At the moment, they don't really seem to care about competing. Rather they seem content with just resting on their laurels of having the best selling console in the US last generation.

Having cancelled my PS4 and looking at probably getting one of the consoles mid next year, doing the above would make the decision on which to get much tougher. As of right now it's 100% PS4 again, but just not now.
Yep those would be great moves on MS's part

  1. Move apps out of the paywall
  2. Continue Games with Gold onto XB1
  3. Offer a lower price or a lower priced kinectless SKU
 
Oct 27, 2004
103,739
3
0
34
Nowhere, PA
Totally understand what you are saying. I hope they start by announcing that all apps that are free elsewhere get removed from the paywall and announcing that the Xbox Gold free games thing will begin day one on Xbox One. I think that would do a lot to show that they are seriously about making it up to the consumer. At the moment, they don't really seem to care about competing. Rather they seem content with just resting on their laurels of having the best selling console in the US last generation.

Having cancelled my PS4 and looking at probably getting one of the consoles mid next year, doing the above would make the decision on which to get much tougher. As of right now it's 100% PS4 again, but just not now.
I think they need a new strategy too for sharing the system.

1. Focus on tangible benefits of Cloud/Azure Network, ala Dedicated Servers. It is a demonstrable advantage that at the moment their competitor cannot match easily at scale. There are also other ways Cloud can (and has) been helping people, so they can highlight those as well. Don't use it to try to wade into a tech war that most people agree they've already lost. It is a very poor strategy to keep intentionally bringing up your [relative] weaknesses.

2. Focus on the justifying the value through genuine brand diversification. I.e., showcase the Kinect and what it can do prominently. That may seem counter intuitive for us hardcore gamers, but they went with a certain design philosophy for the system and for some reason seem afraid to unabashedly push it. I don't even like the technology and i think they're advertising the system wrong. Unfortunately they're late with their Kinect flagship game, but if they could change time, they should focus on bringing two big Kinect titles around launch developed internally that specifically aim to highlight the ways the tech has improved. Project Spark is also a good tool and everyone can use it, don't need Gold. Put it front and center more, it's quite innovative and appeals to casuals and hardcore alike.

3. As you said, demonstrate their willingness to not only go back on bad decisions as they did with the 180s, but maybe take an extra step and 'apologize' by removing most apps from the paywall like PS4 and Wii U. If the competition is doing it, there is very little justification for them to do it other than milking consumers. We accepted it before, but the competition is heating up, and with everything that has occurred it's the sort of gesture that can regain a ton of goodwill they lost. Most people are still going to buy XBL, so the loss would be relatively minor by comparison to the gains in gamer goodwill.

4. They claimed they had a very special 'digital future' planned for the XBO before the 180s, and said several features that existed as reason this would make people want it. Well, despite everything, most of those features can still happen in a post-180 world. There is no reason, for example, they could not do some form of family sharing or offer compelling digital features or game switching. If they want to convince people these sorts of things would be worth an eventual shift, it's important they start demonstrating slowly the types of things we'd be able to do and how they'd handle it. Specifically, they should have a special digital incentive program that gives many benefits to those who buy digitally, including substantive discounts on EVERY day one release (say like PC, $40-$50 instead of $60), digital "bonuses" like soundtracks, maps, documentaries, etc. They should have Steam like features that also show they can hang with the best. In this way, they begin to not only advocate for a digital future in a convincing manner, but also provide an environment that starts to differentiate itself from its other primary competitors.

5. Razor focus on games. Diversification is key. Variety is key. Take risks. Don't settle into a 'comfort zone' where you release a bunch of unique and varied stuff in the first year or two, and then just repeat sequels on four of them for the rest of the gen. I think they're actually doing a really good job with their exclusive lineup for the first year, and their launch stuff really appeals to me even more than PS4 (Crimson Dragon, Forza 5, Dead Rising 3), but they have to continue that into the future. Of course right now it's too early to say if that will be the case, of if they'd begin to drop off like they did at the end of 360's life once they shifted to Kinect crap