What do the next-gen twins bring to the table?

  • 56 results
  • 1
  • 2
#1 Posted by mariokart97 (837 posts) -

Keeping this discussion simple and unbiased, I do not own either of the two next-gen systems(Xbox One or PS4) and I would like to know the unique features for both. In the same way that the 3DS allows stereoscopic 3D or the Wii U has a controller with a tablet sized screen, what unique qualities does the PS4 or Xbox One have that no other console has?

Since it is my belief that a console needs to justify its existence with unique qualities and innovations, I would like to apply this mentality to the new next gen consoles.

In the past this mentality has proven worth while in determining the overall worth of a system. For example:

N64- Introduced the modern joystic

PS1- Introduced dual-joystics and clickable sticks as well

Dreamcast- Web Browser

Wii- Motion Control

NES- D-Pad

and the list goes on...but you get my point.

SO what justifies the Xbox One and PS4's existence??

#2 Posted by farrell2k (6121 posts) -

The Dreamcast made online play on consoles mainstream, for as mainstream as the Dreamcast actually was.

The XB1 and PS4 are consoles that no one asked for, and do not differentiate themselves in any meaningful way from their predecessors.

#3 Posted by mariokart97 (837 posts) -

@farrell2k said:

The Dreamcast made online play on consoles mainstream, for as mainstream as the Dreamcast actually was.

The XB1 and PS4 are consoles that no one asked for, and do not differentiate themselves in any meaningful way from their predecessors.

I agree, the Dreamcast did make leaps into the quite new online-gaming world we so commonly know today. I love that by the way, that Sega was actually thinking in the right direction. But you truly don't think PS4 and XBONE bring anything new??

#4 Posted by DEadliNE-Zero0 (2450 posts) -

TV, movies and streaming rentals instead of BC.

#5 Posted by bobbetybob (19276 posts) -

That's a completely ridiculous way of judging a consoles worth. With this logic Sony should have just stuck with the PS1 for the past 20 years because what did the PS2 even bring to the table, you know, apart from improved processing power which allowed for more realistic and immerse worlds as well as new game types that were nowhere close to being possible on the PS1.

So here's what's unique about the PS4 and Xbox One: they have more power than any of the consoles before them and that's as a perfectly justifiable reason for them to exist.

#6 Posted by mariokart97 (837 posts) -

@deadline-zero0 said:

TV, movies and streaming rentals instead of BC.

That's pretty wack since my Wii U has netflix and netflix>>>>TV a long time ago....

#7 Edited by tonitorsi (8397 posts) -

They're not suppose to bring anything but serve as a medium for playing video games.

Sony made it clear that's the message for the PS4.

#8 Posted by farrell2k (6121 posts) -

@mariokart97 said:

@farrell2k said:

The Dreamcast made online play on consoles mainstream, for as mainstream as the Dreamcast actually was.

The XB1 and PS4 are consoles that no one asked for, and do not differentiate themselves in any meaningful way from their predecessors.

I agree, the Dreamcast did make leaps into the quite new online-gaming world we so commonly know today. I love that by the way, that Sega was actually thinking in the right direction. But you truly don't think PS4 and XBONE bring anything new??

What really differentiates the xb1 and ps4 from the 360 and ps4, besides more compute power? It's really just more of the same.

#9 Posted by clyde46 (46294 posts) -

Wait, is this the Uber sheep Mariokart97 from way?!

#10 Posted by mariokart97 (837 posts) -

@bobbetybob said:

That's a completely ridiculous way of judging a consoles worth. With this logic Sony should have just stuck with the PS1 for the past 20 years because what did the PS2 even bring to the table, you know, apart from improved processing power which allowed for more realistic and immerse worlds as well as new game types that were nowhere close to being possible on the PS1.

So here's what's unique about the PS4 and Xbox One: they have more power than any of the consoles before them and that's as a perfectly justifiable reason for them to exist.

With your logic wouldn't the PC be the best platform since it has the most power every single generation? Except I would argue that unique qualities about a system's controller that allows new and unseen gameplay is more important.

#11 Posted by SolidTy (43330 posts) -

Sharing clips with your friends and live streaming.

Or you know, you could just play the cool ass games that release.

#12 Posted by SeriousGaming (48 posts) -

What do the Sega Genesis and Super Nintendo bring to the table besides more colors and more buttons? 16-bits? That's just double 8-bits! More of the same.

@mariokart97 said:

@bobbetybob said:

That's a completely ridiculous way of judging a consoles worth. With this logic Sony should have just stuck with the PS1 for the past 20 years because what did the PS2 even bring to the table, you know, apart from improved processing power which allowed for more realistic and immerse worlds as well as new game types that were nowhere close to being possible on the PS1.

So here's what's unique about the PS4 and Xbox One: they have more power than any of the consoles before them and that's as a perfectly justifiable reason for them to exist.

With your logic wouldn't the PC be the best platform since it has the most power every single generation? Except I would argue that unique qualities about a system's controller that allows new and unseen gameplay is more important.

New and unseen gameplay is not necessarily good or an improvement.

#13 Posted by Lulu_Lulu (13019 posts) -

They bring alot of things to the table, but Backwards Compatibility and Local Multiplayer aint one of them so fuck'em ! :p

#14 Posted by mariokart97 (837 posts) -
@SolidTy said:

Sharing clips with your friends and live streaming.

Or you know, you could just play the cool ass games that release.

If these games existed on other platforms could they be just as kick ass? Because if they could then what is the innovative quality that makes the games kick ass on that particular platform in the first place?

#15 Posted by clyde46 (46294 posts) -

I can see that MC97 is still as mad as ever.

#16 Posted by MonsieurX (30253 posts) -

HD ports.

#17 Posted by MBirdy88 (8240 posts) -

@mariokart97 said:

@bobbetybob said:

That's a completely ridiculous way of judging a consoles worth. With this logic Sony should have just stuck with the PS1 for the past 20 years because what did the PS2 even bring to the table, you know, apart from improved processing power which allowed for more realistic and immerse worlds as well as new game types that were nowhere close to being possible on the PS1.

So here's what's unique about the PS4 and Xbox One: they have more power than any of the consoles before them and that's as a perfectly justifiable reason for them to exist.

With your logic wouldn't the PC be the best platform since it has the most power every single generation? Except I would argue that unique qualities about a system's controller that allows new and unseen gameplay is more important.

Well your arguement is flawed because neither the 3DS or the Wii U offer any new forms of gameplay.... not any that stand out anyway. 3D is just graphics processing.... and adds nothing gameplay wise. the Wii U pad ... is just a controller with a touch screen... at best just an extra menu screen or portable console (I'm not saying its bad) but nothing ground breaking from a gameplay perspective. also the Wii Motes life was short lived.... after its hype went away.

The Twins offer power, more social/internet based features that bring them out of the stone age, proper multitasking ect ect.

A perpiperal will only take you so far... as Nintendo are finding out....

#18 Posted by SeriousGaming (48 posts) -

@mariokart97 said:
@SolidTy said:

Sharing clips with your friends and live streaming.

Or you know, you could just play the cool ass games that release.

If these games existed on other platforms could they be just as kick ass? Because if they could then what is the innovative quality that makes the games kick ass on that particular platform in the first place?

If those other platforms were less powerful, then no. *Cough* Wii U *Cough*.

#19 Edited by SolidTy (43330 posts) -

@mariokart97 said:
@SolidTy said:

Sharing clips with your friends and live streaming.

Or you know, you could just play the cool ass games that release.

If these games existed on other platforms could they be just as kick ass? Because if they could then what is the innovative quality that makes the games kick ass on that particular platform in the first place?

If Dreamcast gets credit from you for something as lame as a web browser, then I've answered your question. Sharing Clips and Live Streaming games on consoles. There you go.

As far as these new machines, they are new. Key word: New. They haven't been out a year yet to impress anyone, just like any new machine. I remember when my brand new Wii U from 2012 was a rough start. Same for 2005's 360. 2000s PS2, 1996s N64, etc. I've been gaming decades, this is nothing new for me. Make this thread next summer, a year from today, and I'll probably have some answers for you on what games are kick ass and validate these machines. If I don't, then I'll say these are the worst machines ever in my long history of gaming, but I doubt it.

Personally, I play my last gen games more than current gen, but I knew this going in that a first year is rougher.

#20 Posted by R3FURBISHED (10568 posts) -

@farrell2k said:

The XB1 and PS4 are consoles that no one asked for, and do not differentiate themselves in any meaningful way from their predecessors.

People don't want anything different though. The gaming populace doesn't want a console that does something new or something that proclaims it will try and bring "new" to the table

#21 Posted by kinectthedots (1930 posts) -

Funny, I always looked at what games a system had to determine if they were worth existing.

NES = Mario

Sega Genesis = Sonic

PS1 = GT3, Tekken

Saturn = Virtua Fighter 2, Panzer Dragoon

N64 = Killer Instinct, Super Mario 64, Star Fox

Dreamcast = Soul Calibur, Sonic Adventure

PS2 = MGS2, FFX, Tony Hawk, Tekken Tag

Xbox = Halo

PS3 = Uncharted, MGS4, Demon's Souls

Xbox 360 = Forza 3, Halo 3

Xbox one and PS4? so far???

Xbox one = Forza 5

PS4 = Infamous Second Son

#22 Posted by SeriousGaming (48 posts) -

@R3FURBISHED said:

@farrell2k said:

The XB1 and PS4 are consoles that no one asked for, and do not differentiate themselves in any meaningful way from their predecessors.

People don't want anything different though. The gaming populace doesn't want a console that does something new or something that proclaims it will try and bring "new" to the table

Exactly. The Wii was a success because it appealed to a demographic other than that gaming populace.

#23 Posted by mariokart97 (837 posts) -

@MBirdy88 said:

@mariokart97 said:

@bobbetybob said:

That's a completely ridiculous way of judging a consoles worth. With this logic Sony should have just stuck with the PS1 for the past 20 years because what did the PS2 even bring to the table, you know, apart from improved processing power which allowed for more realistic and immerse worlds as well as new game types that were nowhere close to being possible on the PS1.

So here's what's unique about the PS4 and Xbox One: they have more power than any of the consoles before them and that's as a perfectly justifiable reason for them to exist.

With your logic wouldn't the PC be the best platform since it has the most power every single generation? Except I would argue that unique qualities about a system's controller that allows new and unseen gameplay is more important.

Well your arguement is flawed because neither the 3DS or the Wii U offer any new forms of gameplay.... not any that stand out anyway. 3D is just graphics processing.... and adds nothing gameplay wise. the Wii U pad ... is just a controller with a touch screen... at best just an extra menu screen or portable console (I'm not saying its bad) but nothing ground breaking from a gameplay perspective. also the Wii Motes life was short lived.... after its hype went away.

The Twins offer power, more social/internet based features that bring them out of the stone age, proper multitasking ect ect.

A perpiperal will only take you so far... as Nintendo are finding out....

See I see your point with the social gaming, that makes sense, I won't deny you that.

In the defense of the Wii U, I have played Black Ops 2 with the Wii U Pro controller and had the Wii U Gamepad on the stand in front of my TV and display the map on the Wii U Gamepad and can quickly look between the TV(where the action is) and the Wii U Gamepad(For the map) whereas with all consoles before it I would have had to pause the game and un-pause to do the same thing.

It acts as a secondary screen while I play on the Wii U Pro controller and it helps me to occasionally blow up enemy care packages since I see where they are landing on the map since I have enough time. Nothing super groundbreaking but do you see how it isn't really possible on any other platform?

#24 Posted by Heirren (17092 posts) -

Sony and MS are bringing a bunch of nonsense. Gamers bought into it last gen and they will continue to do so this gen.

#25 Edited by SeriousGaming (48 posts) -

@mariokart97 said:

@MBirdy88 said:

@mariokart97 said:

@bobbetybob said:

That's a completely ridiculous way of judging a consoles worth. With this logic Sony should have just stuck with the PS1 for the past 20 years because what did the PS2 even bring to the table, you know, apart from improved processing power which allowed for more realistic and immerse worlds as well as new game types that were nowhere close to being possible on the PS1.

So here's what's unique about the PS4 and Xbox One: they have more power than any of the consoles before them and that's as a perfectly justifiable reason for them to exist.

With your logic wouldn't the PC be the best platform since it has the most power every single generation? Except I would argue that unique qualities about a system's controller that allows new and unseen gameplay is more important.

Well your arguement is flawed because neither the 3DS or the Wii U offer any new forms of gameplay.... not any that stand out anyway. 3D is just graphics processing.... and adds nothing gameplay wise. the Wii U pad ... is just a controller with a touch screen... at best just an extra menu screen or portable console (I'm not saying its bad) but nothing ground breaking from a gameplay perspective. also the Wii Motes life was short lived.... after its hype went away.

The Twins offer power, more social/internet based features that bring them out of the stone age, proper multitasking ect ect.

A perpiperal will only take you so far... as Nintendo are finding out....

See I see your point with the social gaming, that makes sense, I won't deny you that.

In the defense of the Wii U, I have played Black Ops 2 with the Wii U Pro controller and had the Wii U Gamepad on the stand in front of my TV and display the map on the Wii U Gamepad and can quickly look between the TV(where the action is) and the Wii U Gamepad(For the map) whereas with all consoles before it I would have had to pause the game and un-pause to do the same thing.

It acts as a secondary screen while I play on the Wii U Pro controller and it helps me to occasionally blow up enemy care packages since I see where they are landing on the map since I have enough time. Nothing super groundbreaking but do you see how it isn't really possible on any other platform?

But that's not new or innovative. The DS already did that a decade ago.

Glue a DS to an Xbox 360 and call it innovative.

#26 Posted by Hate_me_now22 (24 posts) -

With that mindset, nobody should buy a new car until they can start flying or running on clean energy. Technological advances happen in small, incremental steps, with each step building on top of the other. These news systems offer more power, an ease of us, new games operatic at better resolutions with lower weight times, and more multiplayer options. Most importantly, our purchases of them fuel the market so that technology can KEEP advancing and so you can eventually get that huge, monumental, proclaim-it-to-the-mountains advances.

#27 Edited by mariokart97 (837 posts) -

@seriousgaming said:

@mariokart97 said:

@MBirdy88 said:

@mariokart97 said:

@bobbetybob said:

That's a completely ridiculous way of judging a consoles worth. With this logic Sony should have just stuck with the PS1 for the past 20 years because what did the PS2 even bring to the table, you know, apart from improved processing power which allowed for more realistic and immerse worlds as well as new game types that were nowhere close to being possible on the PS1.

So here's what's unique about the PS4 and Xbox One: they have more power than any of the consoles before them and that's as a perfectly justifiable reason for them to exist.

With your logic wouldn't the PC be the best platform since it has the most power every single generation? Except I would argue that unique qualities about a system's controller that allows new and unseen gameplay is more important.

Well your arguement is flawed because neither the 3DS or the Wii U offer any new forms of gameplay.... not any that stand out anyway. 3D is just graphics processing.... and adds nothing gameplay wise. the Wii U pad ... is just a controller with a touch screen... at best just an extra menu screen or portable console (I'm not saying its bad) but nothing ground breaking from a gameplay perspective. also the Wii Motes life was short lived.... after its hype went away.

The Twins offer power, more social/internet based features that bring them out of the stone age, proper multitasking ect ect.

A perpiperal will only take you so far... as Nintendo are finding out....

See I see your point with the social gaming, that makes sense, I won't deny you that.

In the defense of the Wii U, I have played Black Ops 2 with the Wii U Pro controller and had the Wii U Gamepad on the stand in front of my TV and display the map on the Wii U Gamepad and can quickly look between the TV(where the action is) and the Wii U Gamepad(For the map) whereas with all consoles before it I would have had to pause the game and un-pause to do the same thing.

It acts as a secondary screen while I play on the Wii U Pro controller and it helps me to occasionally blow up enemy care packages since I see where they are landing on the map since I have enough time. Nothing super groundbreaking but do you see how it isn't really possible on any other platform?

But that's not new or innovative. The DS already did that a decade ago.

Glue a DS to an Xbox 360 and call it innovative.

Not quite. I understand they both use the dual screen idea but the DS doesn't provide an equal experience. With the Wii U I have the standard large HD TV but I also have the smaller Wii U gamepad screen to the side of it. With the Wii U I can more easily position the screens to my liking rather than the DS where it is more restricted.

#28 Posted by AmazonTreeBoa (16745 posts) -

@mariokart97 said:

What do the next-gen twins bring to the table?

What next gen twins?

#29 Posted by M8ingSeezun (2003 posts) -
  • Strong 3rd Party support
  • Multiplat Big Budget titles and franchises
  • which can lead to Newer Ips

#30 Posted by thehig1 (2035 posts) -

@kinectthedots said:

Funny, I always looked at what games a system had to determine if they were worth existing.

NES = Mario, Contra, CastlVania, Zelda, Duck Tales, Metroid, Mega Man 2

Sega Genesis = Sonic, Gunsar Heros, CastleVania(Bloodlines), Streets of Rage 2

PS1 = GT3, Tekken, Resident Evil, Silent Hill, Abes Exodus, CastlVania SOTN, Final Fantasy VII, Chrono Cross

Saturn = Virtua Fighter 2, Panzer Dragoon, House of The Dead, Virtua Cop, Clockwork Knight 2, Gaurdian Heros, Deep Fear

Had to add a few games to those systems, as they were my favorites. Also what is GT3 on the Playstation ?

#31 Edited by SeriousGaming (48 posts) -

@mariokart97 said:

@seriousgaming said:

@mariokart97 said:

@MBirdy88 said:

@mariokart97 said:

@bobbetybob said:

That's a completely ridiculous way of judging a consoles worth. With this logic Sony should have just stuck with the PS1 for the past 20 years because what did the PS2 even bring to the table, you know, apart from improved processing power which allowed for more realistic and immerse worlds as well as new game types that were nowhere close to being possible on the PS1.

So here's what's unique about the PS4 and Xbox One: they have more power than any of the consoles before them and that's as a perfectly justifiable reason for them to exist.

With your logic wouldn't the PC be the best platform since it has the most power every single generation? Except I would argue that unique qualities about a system's controller that allows new and unseen gameplay is more important.

Well your arguement is flawed because neither the 3DS or the Wii U offer any new forms of gameplay.... not any that stand out anyway. 3D is just graphics processing.... and adds nothing gameplay wise. the Wii U pad ... is just a controller with a touch screen... at best just an extra menu screen or portable console (I'm not saying its bad) but nothing ground breaking from a gameplay perspective. also the Wii Motes life was short lived.... after its hype went away.

The Twins offer power, more social/internet based features that bring them out of the stone age, proper multitasking ect ect.

A perpiperal will only take you so far... as Nintendo are finding out....

See I see your point with the social gaming, that makes sense, I won't deny you that.

In the defense of the Wii U, I have played Black Ops 2 with the Wii U Pro controller and had the Wii U Gamepad on the stand in front of my TV and display the map on the Wii U Gamepad and can quickly look between the TV(where the action is) and the Wii U Gamepad(For the map) whereas with all consoles before it I would have had to pause the game and un-pause to do the same thing.

It acts as a secondary screen while I play on the Wii U Pro controller and it helps me to occasionally blow up enemy care packages since I see where they are landing on the map since I have enough time. Nothing super groundbreaking but do you see how it isn't really possible on any other platform?

But that's not new or innovative. The DS already did that a decade ago.

Glue a DS to an Xbox 360 and call it innovative.

Not quite. I understand they both use the dual screen idea but the DS doesn't provide an equal experience. With the Wii U I have the standard large HD TV but I also have the smaller Wii U gamepad screen to the side of it. With the Wii U I can more easily position the screens to my liking rather than the DS where it is more restricted.

A minor convenience, not a huge leap forward or anything. Sounds about as innovative as wireless controllers, or the Gamecube controller featuring a d-pad that can be accessed by moving the thumb from the control stick, as opposed to moving the entire hand like the N64 controller required.

#32 Posted by parkurtommo (27067 posts) -

I think theses consoles were just a way to soften down the complaints of last gen's consoles getting old. It's basically more of the same. I'd say they're more like a PS3 and 360 2.0.

Who even cares at this point... It's pointless. No one listens.

Just keep gaming. And if you ever get tired of getting ripped off, move to PC, where you'll get slightly less ripped off.

#33 Posted by MirkoS77 (7499 posts) -

Consoles are for playing games.....that is ultimately the only justification needed for their existence.

#34 Posted by charizard1605 (57725 posts) -

The logic in the OP is ridiculously bad. A console does not need a defining trait to exist. It needs great games to exist. As of right now, the PS4 and Xbox One are both lacking in that department, but you can bet your ass they will have great games down the line, enough great games to justify them.

If you want more proof that defining traits are ultimately useless, let's pick two systems you pointed out in the OP: 3DS and Wii U. 3DS and Wii U are great systems, but not because of the 3D or the tablet, but because of the great games that they have. These games are great not because of the 3D or tablet, but in spite of them. Therefore, by extension, the 3DS and Wii U are great not because of their gimmicks, but in spite of them.

Ultimately, it's about the games. PS4 and Xbox One will be fine.

#35 Edited by farrell2k (6121 posts) -

@charizard1605 said:
Ultimately, it's about the games. PS4 and Xbox One will be fine.

Yet the Wiiu, with the best games, is not fine.

#36 Edited by charizard1605 (57725 posts) -

@farrell2k said:

@charizard1605 said:
Ultimately, it's about the games. PS4 and Xbox One will be fine.

Yet the Wiiu, with the best games, is not fine.

It sure is fine. Is it setting the world on fire? No. Is it selling well? No. Is it losing a lot of money? Yes. Are the software sales good enough to justify continued investment? Yes.

The system is a failure, but the software ecosystem continues to exist and grow. From my perspective, as a gamer? More games=fine. I'll leave it to Nintendo to worry about the number crunching.

#37 Edited by Shielder7 (5152 posts) -

@charizard1605 said:

@farrell2k said:

@charizard1605 said:
Ultimately, it's about the games. PS4 and Xbox One will be fine.

Yet the Wiiu, with the best games, is not fine.

It sure is fine. Is it setting the world on fire? No. Is it selling well? No. Is it losing a lot of money? Yes. Are the software sales good enough to justify continued investment? Yes.

You sure Nintendo agrees with that?

You can't sell software without people having the hardware, not to mention when the PS 4 and Xbones software become stronger it will take a bit out of the already hurting Nintendo. Nintendos software is stronger now basically because it had a years head start when the Wii U first launched it had crap as well and it doesn't have that 3rd party support.

#38 Posted by edwardecl (2239 posts) -

PS1 = Introduced nothing new apart from optical disc based copy protection that was difficult to circumvent without modding, don't know of any prior use.
PS2 = Upgraded PS1
PS3 = Upgraded PS2
PS4 = Upgraded PS3

Xbox = Introduced nothing new
Xbox360 = Upgraded Xbox
Xbox One = Upgraded Xbox360 with Kinect 2.0 camera bundled, unless something else come with a bundled camera.

NES = Introduces nothing new
SNES = Upgraded NES
N64 = Upgraded SNES
Gamecube = Upgraded N64
Wii = Slightly Upgraded Gamecube with first motion controller bundled with a console.
Wii-U = Upgraded Wii with tablet controller.

When I mean upgraded I mean increased overall specification, obviously the architecture changes. And when I mean introduces nothing new I mean nothing new in the form of previously existing technologies or stuff that has been done before.

#39 Posted by Gaming-Planet (14022 posts) -

They made them more like PCs but with low/mid range parts.

Next gen offers:

Better graphics than last gen. That is a given.

Microtransactions.

Pay2win.

More DLC.

Remasters.

#40 Edited by svaubel (2478 posts) -

@farrell2k:

Neither brings anything new to the table. Unless you count removing many features their predecessors had.

#41 Posted by Bigboi500 (29934 posts) -

TV and SPORTS! Oh and games, one of these days.

#42 Edited by commonfate (12391 posts) -

Xbox One has P90X for kinect which looks pretty interesting.

#43 Posted by Vecna (3394 posts) -

The most positive change I have seen is more developers switching lead platform to pc.

Thank you for switching to gimped pc architecture Sony and Microsoft.

#44 Edited by nutcrackr (12604 posts) -

@Gaming-Planet said:

Microtransactions.

Pay2win.

More DLC.

Remasters.

Nailed it.

#46 Posted by Spartan070 (16352 posts) -

What "justifies their existence?"

Is revolution necessary for evolution?

#47 Posted by MdBrOtha04 (1822 posts) -

@bobbetybob said:

That's a completely ridiculous way of judging a consoles worth. With this logic Sony should have just stuck with the PS1 for the past 20 years because what did the PS2 even bring to the table, you know, apart from improved processing power which allowed for more realistic and immerse worlds as well as new game types that were nowhere close to being possible on the PS1.

So here's what's unique about the PS4 and Xbox One: they have more power than any of the consoles before them and that's as a perfectly justifiable reason for them to exist.

DVD drive = More storage for games, DVD player,

#48 Posted by scottpsfan14 (5280 posts) -
@MBirdy88 said:

@mariokart97 said:

@bobbetybob said:

That's a completely ridiculous way of judging a consoles worth. With this logic Sony should have just stuck with the PS1 for the past 20 years because what did the PS2 even bring to the table, you know, apart from improved processing power which allowed for more realistic and immerse worlds as well as new game types that were nowhere close to being possible on the PS1.

So here's what's unique about the PS4 and Xbox One: they have more power than any of the consoles before them and that's as a perfectly justifiable reason for them to exist.

With your logic wouldn't the PC be the best platform since it has the most power every single generation? Except I would argue that unique qualities about a system's controller that allows new and unseen gameplay is more important.

Well your arguement is flawed because neither the 3DS or the Wii U offer any new forms of gameplay.... not any that stand out anyway. 3D is just graphics processing.... and adds nothing gameplay wise. the Wii U pad ... is just a controller with a touch screen... at best just an extra menu screen or portable console (I'm not saying its bad) but nothing ground breaking from a gameplay perspective. also the Wii Motes life was short lived.... after its hype went away.

The Twins offer power, more social/internet based features that bring them out of the stone age, proper multitasking ect ect.

A perpiperal will only take you so far... as Nintendo are finding out....

All in all a well rounded post. Full of facts.

#49 Posted by B4X (4795 posts) -

Games?

#50 Edited by Speak_Low (1087 posts) -

They bring you your games, that's what.

A majority of the AAA games you just can't wait to play on PC were funded by the massive contributions of the PS360 and PS4/X1 sales. PC does fairly well but on its own, but it's not enough. Wii U is worthless in terms of revenue.

Take away Sony/MS and just have it be PC + Wii U, and watch AAA games like MGS 5, GTA V, Batman: Arkham Knight, Watch_Dogs, Far Cry 4, Mass Effect 4, and Destiny disappear or cut down significantly in scope or style. PC is going to fund all of this by itself? That's some painful carrying on the shoulders right there.

This is also like asking why Paramont, FOX and Warner Bros keep releasing horror movies, animated movies, family movies, romantic comedies, and smaller films. Because, combined, they can help fund the big risk summer films you love to watch. Asking why the PS4/X1 exist means you are forgetting where the AAA developers are getting a majority of their money to make these games.

PC gamers (some of the extreme elitists) need to get used to the fact that a majority of the potential hundreds of millions of gamers across the world are not huge PC gamers. This isn't a knock on the platform. The middle segment tends to be the most popular (and sometimes even balanced) choice.

Do you see me laughing at people who don't constantly enjoy the upper extremes of life and stay in expensive 5-star hotels that cost $300 a night? Should I laugh at you eating at Taco Bell and drinking soda and chips when you aren't fine dining and tasting foie gras, caviar and $200 wine every day?