PCmag.com: Xbox One Is the New Standard That Future Consoles Should Imitate

Avatar image for tryit
#151 Posted by TryIt (12968 posts) -

@kenshiro3948 said:
@tryit said:
@kenshiro3948 said:

Shit article is shit. More consoles should copy the console that’s getting its ass handed to it by the competition? What kind of drugs is the writer smoking?

Oh PC mag, that explains it. He’s only saying more consoles should be like Xbox so that he doesn’t have to buy a console lol. Port begging at its finest.

did you notice by change that it appears PCMag doesnt even have articles about PCs anymore...odd that

I noticed that too, I wonder why.

my theory is that because PC sales are down they just want to use the brand of the magazine but yet still attract readers.

Now PC Gamer mag I think is intentionally trying to persuade people that consoles are the better choice. I think they are more conspiratorial in their asshatery

Avatar image for dzimm
#152 Posted by dzimm (5079 posts) -

@tryit said:
@kenshiro3948 said:
@tryit said:
@kenshiro3948 said:

Shit article is shit. More consoles should copy the console that’s getting its ass handed to it by the competition? What kind of drugs is the writer smoking?

Oh PC mag, that explains it. He’s only saying more consoles should be like Xbox so that he doesn’t have to buy a console lol. Port begging at its finest.

did you notice by change that it appears PCMag doesnt even have articles about PCs anymore...odd that

I noticed that too, I wonder why.

my theory is that because PC sales are down they just want to use the brand of the magazine but yet still attract readers.

Now PC Gamer mag I think is intentionally trying to persuade people that consoles are the better choice. I think they are more conspiratorial in their asshatery

PC Gamer has sucked pretty hard for several years. They were the best in the print days, but not since the internet killed the magazine industry.

Avatar image for Chutebox
#153 Posted by Chutebox (44056 posts) -
@i_p_daily said:

@knight-k: This thread and the X thread prove that your fanbase are the losers, even when your fanbase is winning you act like losers.

Worst fanbase in gaming history confirmed.

Bud, do you honestly think you are any better?

Avatar image for recloud
#154 Posted by ReCloud (4423 posts) -

@Chutebox said:
@i_p_daily said:

@knight-k: This thread and the X thread prove that your fanbase are the losers, even when your fanbase is winning you act like losers.

Worst fanbase in gaming history confirmed.

Bud, do you honestly think you are any better?

Anyone is better than you.

Avatar image for ronvalencia
#155 Edited by ronvalencia (26541 posts) -

@zappat said:
@ronvalencia said:
@zappat said:
@ronvalencia said:

Retail XBO in dev mode doesn't need MS intervention i.e. it's like Windows UWP environment without Explorer.exe desktop component.

The only stupid person is you.

The fact is that MS had no say in the development of FFXIV and its crossplay functionality. Whatever stupidity you're trying to say with your kindergarden-level english doesn't change that fact.

So what? My comment is against "We're talking about the Xbox here and anybody can make a game for Windows without MS having anything to do with it."

Both retail Xbox One in dev mode and Windows PC allows end users to develop and run apps without MS being involved.

For mass app deployment on non dev-mode XBO, MS's DRM must get involved and enforced.

For mass app deployment on Windows, app shouldn't cause mass BSOD. DRM is optional on PC. Valid certificate signed executable is recommended to avoid warning message at start up. Driver signed certificate is enforced, hence news media blowup with mobile Ryzen vega driver lack of update issue i.e. end user couldn't modify INF to insert their laptop's device IDs.

The only stupid person is you.

"App shouldn't cause massive BSOD". Well duh, that is true for any OS since it would render it useless, still this has nothing to do with the FACT that FFXIV didn't have to be financed, distributed, developed or approved by MS in any shape or form. Are you 5 years old?

You're wrong with "We're talking about the Xbox here and anybody can make a game for Windows without MS having anything to do with it."

A person with Microsoft Live/Xbox account and retail XBO or X1X can enable dev mode which can run homebrew programs without MS being involved.

Avatar image for tormentos
#156 Posted by tormentos (28017 posts) -

@Steppy_76 said:

Who knows who's idea it was first? As stated already, two products that take a minimum of 18 months to develop release within 3 months of each other. The xbox drive was available for every game to use from day 1 was used to cache info from the DVD drive(5 years before the PS3), the PS2 harddrive was only for FF11 for a long time, and even after, games had to be programmed with it in mind for another year or two.

The PS3 would partially install parts of the game on the HDD and still read some assets off the bluray. The 360 allowed FULL game installs and the disc was only used as owner verification. Which of these two sounds like the way games are installed now?

Neither gamepass nor PSNow is exactly a new idea they're both digital rental services which have existed for other media for years before either came out. We'd have to see how well PS4 games would perform on the service to truly compare, but I have a hard time believing that streaming it is going to give equivalent performance for the end user.

Woohoo, Sony did crossplay before MS...even though both were beat by 12 years or so by the Dreamcast.

Do you guys even think any of this through?

How do i know? very simple.

The machine is also equipped with one Type III PC card slot. In 2001, Sony will ship a PC Card Ethernet adapter so that the PS2 can connect directly to the Internet via a cable modem, Sony's Kutaragi said. At the same time, the vendor will sell a high-capacity hard drive for the PS2, he added.

http://edition.cnn.com/TECH/computing/9909/14/ps2.idg/

Because i KNOW this ^^ September 1999 the xbox was nowhere to be seen,in fact the Dreamcast was just releasing,it clearly was sony's idea.

And the PS2 and xbox were not separated by 3 months,the PS2 release on March 2000,but was reveal on 1999,the xbox was release on November 2001 and was reveal on mid 2000.

So again yeah sony was first and in fact the HDD release for PS2 on July 2001 the xbox wasn't even out,so yeah MS stole sony idea,and the implementation wasn't like HDD DO today the xbox didn't allow for game install,the PS2 did the PS3 did as well.

The 360 allowed full install WAYYYYYYY after sony allowed installs,and in fact most lemmings cry about install on PS3,only to hype the shit once MS change its stance to allow full installs.

Again on consoles NO,PS NOW was a novelty and MS copy it.

The Dreamcast didn't beat sony to cross play by 12 years get your facts right dude,FF11 had cross play on PS2 with PC on 2002,sega did it on quake on 2001 so they beat sony by 1 year,and MS by 5 since FFXl came on 2006 to 360 and was cross play with the PS2 and PC.

And by the way last gen and at the start of this gen it was MS who refused to allow cross play with PS using pathetic excuses.

Avatar image for Pedro
#157 Posted by Pedro (32147 posts) -

MS did not steal the idea of hard drive from Sony you silly person. The hard drive was and always has been a critical component of the Xbox hardware. Why are you trying to change history to fit a false narrative.

"The notion that Microsoft should develop its own gaming console began gaining traction way back in 1998, with Kevin Bachus, Seamus Blackley, Otto Berkes, and Ted Hase forming the software giant’s first console team after successfully pitching their idea to Bill Gates. Originally dubbed the DirectX Box, the console was intended to be the first game system built like a PC, bringing all of the flexibility and power of a gaming rig to the console market."

Avatar image for tormentos
#158 Edited by tormentos (28017 posts) -

@Pedro said:

MS did not steal the idea of hard drive from Sony you silly person. The hard drive was and always has been a critical component of the Xbox hardware. Why are you trying to change history to fit a false narrative.

"The notion that Microsoft should develop its own gaming console began gaining traction way back in 1998, with Kevin Bachus, Seamus Blackley, Otto Berkes, and Ted Hase forming the software giant’s first console team after successfully pitching their idea to Bill Gates. Originally dubbed the DirectX Box, the console was intended to be the first game system built like a PC, bringing all of the flexibility and power of a gaming rig to the console market."

Nice try LINK me to 1998 talk of the xbox as i linked you to sony PUBLICLY claiming HDD,not on some obscure room where no one can confirm anything,and the xbox was no like a PC you could not install games on IT.

And by the way it says nothing about HDD directly.

In fact The PS2 was unveil in september 1999 and release 6 months latter,but development begin way before 1999,by that time the platform was already made,so trying to imply that sony came with the idea in 1999 is a joke by 1999 the platform was already make and with a slot on the back to fit an HDD.

Avatar image for Pedro
#159 Edited by Pedro (32147 posts) -

@tormentos said:

Nice try LINK me to 1998 talk of the xbox as i linked you to sony PUBLICLY claiming HDD,not on some obscure room where no one can confirm anything,and the xbox was no like a PC you could not install games on IT.

And by the way it says nothing about HDD directly.

In fact The PS2 was unveil in september 1999 and release 6 months latter,but development begin way before 1999,by that time the platform was already made,so trying to imply that sony came with the idea in 1999 is a joke by 1999 the platform was already make and with a slot on the back to fit an HDD.

You can argue till your head pops but the fact remains that Xbox is the first console to integrate a hard drive and that integration changed console gaming forever.

Avatar image for tormentos
#160 Edited by tormentos (28017 posts) -

@Pedro said:

You can argue till your head pops but the fact remains that Xbox is the first console to integrate a hard drive and that integration changed console gaming forever.

Oh i never argued that the xbox was the first console to come with an hdd integrated.

You need to learn to fallow arguments,mine is about who ideas was and who used it first.

lol they didn't change anything the xbox didn't allow you to install games until way after sony allowed you to,and sony was the first to have an HDD,the HDD on PS2 predates the xbox release.lol

Just like cross play on PS2 predates even xbox live. :)

Avatar image for rzxv04
#161 Posted by rzxv04 (285 posts) -

Really hope next gen has DV/HDR10/+ and at least a 4K bluray player.

Don't have a One S but have a PS4 and I hope sony considers adding those.

Avatar image for Steppy_76
#162 Posted by Steppy_76 (2378 posts) -

Every game cached data to the xbox harddrive it didn't need larger installs because they put a faster DVD drive in it. It was standard in every unit and every game used it. Without it bundled Sonys hdd got vitually no support. Once again every single game used the xbox drive. It was a fundamental part of the system. Sonys ended up making the ps2 more expensive than the xbox and still lacking most of the features. Please...next thing you'll be claiming is xbl was a copy of psn

Avatar image for Pedro
#163 Posted by Pedro (32147 posts) -

@tormentos said:
@Pedro said:

You can argue till your head pops but the fact remains that Xbox is the first console to integrate a hard drive and that integration changed console gaming forever.

Oh i never argued that the xbox was the first console to come with an hdd integrated.

You need to learn to fallow arguments,mine is about who ideas was and who used it first.

lol they didn't change anything the xbox didn't allow you to install games until way after sony allowed you to,and sony was the first to have an HDD,the HDD on PS2 predates the xbox release.lol

Just like cross play on PS2 predates even xbox live. :)

You made a false claim that MS stole the hard-drive from Sony. Consider "fallowing" your own claims. The PS2 hard-drive implementation was not core to the system thus the reason it was a shitty add-on with almost non existent support. Xbox being not only the first to include a hard-drive but the first console to eliminate the need for memory cards and utilize the hard drive for faster loading of games.

"The PlayStation 2 Hard Disk Drive (PS2 HDD) was released on July 19, 2001 in Japan (together with the Network Adaptor) and on March 23, 2004 in North America."

As for you other babble, that has nothing to do with what I am calling you out on.

Avatar image for Steppy_76
#164 Posted by Steppy_76 (2378 posts) -

@tormentos said:
@Pedro said:

You can argue till your head pops but the fact remains that Xbox is the first console to integrate a hard drive and that integration changed console gaming forever.

Oh i never argued that the xbox was the first console to come with an hdd integrated.

You need to learn to fallow arguments,mine is about who ideas was and who used it first.

lol they didn't change anything the xbox didn't allow you to install games until way after sony allowed you to,and sony was the first to have an HDD,the HDD on PS2 predates the xbox release.lol

Just like cross play on PS2 predates even xbox live. :)

well the industry disagrees with you. The ps2 hdd was so successful most people(and most games in its library)didn't even know it existed.

Avatar image for tormentos
#165 Posted by tormentos (28017 posts) -

@Pedro said:

You made a false claim that MS stole the hard-drive from Sony. Consider "fallowing" your own claims. The PS2 hard-drive implementation was not core to the system thus the reason it was a shitty add-on with almost non existent support. Xbox being not only the first to include a hard-drive but the first console to eliminate the need for memory cards and utilize the hard drive for faster loading of games.

"The PlayStation 2 Hard Disk Drive (PS2 HDD) was released on July 19, 2001 in Japan (together with the Network Adaptor) and on March 23, 2004 in North America."

As for you other babble, that has nothing to do with what I am calling you out on.

Which does nothing to change the fact that SONY DID IT FIRST,if we talk about support the xbox had shit,you simply could not install games on it,in that regard the PS2 had it beat at least some games could be installed.

So basically for installs which is what HDD are mainly use today the xbox had zero support,so basically was a cosmethical integration that could not install retail games at all. That for me is halfassed support as well.

@Steppy_76 said:

Every game cached data to the xbox harddrive it didn't need larger installs because they put a faster DVD drive in it. It was standard in every unit and every game used it. Without it bundled Sonys hdd got vitually no support. Once again every single game used the xbox drive. It was a fundamental part of the system. Sonys ended up making the ps2 more expensive than the xbox and still lacking most of the features. Please...next thing you'll be claiming is xbl was a copy of psn

Using the HDD for cache mean crap,you could not install games PERIOD or run them for the HDD which i may add was 8GB.

Is not about faster DVD the PS2 used streaming tech,which is how GTA has so big levels without actually needing to load while you were driving.

The xbox HDD had no support for game installs,which is what HDD are use today and how PC has work since forever.

Sony didn't make the PS2 more expensive,in fact the PS2 cost sony to make way less than what it cost MS to make an xbox,lets not ignore that the xbox had a DVD drive but didn't allow you to watch dvd movies unless you added a remote controls which unlocked the feature and was extra,and you also need it $50 a year for online as well.

The PS2 drive was $99 dollars and came with 1 game,and it was 40GB, compare that to the 360 much latter HDD that was 20GB and $99 without any games.

Na they had friend list and voice chat universal that was MS,and charged you $50 for P2P while socom ran on dedicated servers and online play on PS2 was free.

Avatar image for Pedro
#166 Edited by Pedro (32147 posts) -

@tormentos said:

Which does nothing to change the fact that SONY DID IT FIRST,if we talk about support the xbox had shit,you simply could not install games on it,in that regard the PS2 had it beat at least some games could be installed.

So basically for installs which is what HDD are mainly use today the xbox had zero support,so basically was a cosmethical integration that could not install retail games at all. That for me is halfassed support as well.

The fact remains that the Xbox is the FIRST console to have an hard-drive integrated. It was factually never done before. It is also the FIRST console to use a hard-drive for gamesaves. Your attempt to dance around this is comical.

The PS2 HDD support was 3 years late(2004) in the US and had practically NO support thus the reason Sony dropped support for it early in its life. You literally CANNOT purchase an Xbox without an hard-drive in the same manner you cannot purchase a modern console without a hard-drive. Don't rewrite the past because you don't like it.

While you are monkeying around on a unused features, list the games that you can install on the PS2 hard-drive outside of FFXI. :)

Avatar image for Steppy_76
#167 Posted by Steppy_76 (2378 posts) -

@Random_Matt said:
@BenjaminBanklin said:
@Random_Matt said:

Less games is pro consumer apparently, and even still needing a sub for free to play. This guy should of engaged his brain before touching his keyboard.

Having no good games to buy is the ultimate pro-consumer move. Then they dump all the rest of the crap on Game Pass, then, VOILA! Xbox cements its place as the welfare gaming console.

Game pass is pretty pro consumer, unfortunately there is jack shit on it. It will be better next gen with all the studios they have bought out.

I think you may want to revisit the list if games available...mcc, the entire gears war series, doom,forza horizon 4... the are some good games available on the service. To pretend otherwise is foolish.

Avatar image for ronvalencia
#168 Edited by ronvalencia (26541 posts) -

@Pedro said:

MS did not steal the idea of hard drive from Sony you silly person. The hard drive was and always has been a critical component of the Xbox hardware. Why are you trying to change history to fit a false narrative.

"The notion that Microsoft should develop its own gaming console began gaining traction way back in 1998, with Kevin Bachus, Seamus Blackley, Otto Berkes, and Ted Hase forming the software giant’s first console team after successfully pitching their idea to Bill Gates. Originally dubbed the DirectX Box, the console was intended to be the first game system built like a PC, bringing all of the flexibility and power of a gaming rig to the console market."

Floating back in early 1990s Amiga Hombre https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Amiga_Hombre_chipset

The original plan for the Hombre-based computer system was to have Windows NT compatibility, with native AmigaOS recompiled for the new big-endian CPU to run legacy 68k Amiga software through emulation. Commodore chose the PA-7150 microprocessor over the MIPSR3000 microprocessor and first generation embedded PowerPC microprocessors, mainly because these low-cost microprocessors were unqualified to run Windows NT. This wasn't the case for the 64-bitMIPSR4200, but it was rejected for its high price at the time.

This early 1990s "Xbox" is powered by WIndows NT 3.x with OpenGL. Hombre's 3D chip is OpenGL compliant. Commodore has plans to offer Hombre chipset as OpenGL and GUI accelerator add-on card for Windows PC. This is before Sega Dreamcast..

Commodore's selection for HP's PA-7150 RISC CPU is mostly due to qualified Windows NT support. Commodore modified PA-RISC CPU with 3D support.

ACER has Commodore's graphics patents.

Avatar image for Random_Matt
#169 Posted by Random_Matt (3480 posts) -
@Steppy_76 said:
@Random_Matt said:
@BenjaminBanklin said:
@Random_Matt said:

Less games is pro consumer apparently, and even still needing a sub for free to play. This guy should of engaged his brain before touching his keyboard.

Having no good games to buy is the ultimate pro-consumer move. Then they dump all the rest of the crap on Game Pass, then, VOILA! Xbox cements its place as the welfare gaming console.

Game pass is pretty pro consumer, unfortunately there is jack shit on it. It will be better next gen with all the studios they have bought out.

I think you may want to revisit the list if games available...mcc, the entire gears war series, doom,forza horizon 4... the are some good games available on the service. To pretend otherwise is foolish.

Chill, never said there were not, just needs more new AA/AAA games. The price for a yearly service is cheap for what you get, no denying that.

Avatar image for scatteh316
#170 Posted by scatteh316 (9956 posts) -
@Pedro said:
@tormentos said:

Nice try LINK me to 1998 talk of the xbox as i linked you to sony PUBLICLY claiming HDD,not on some obscure room where no one can confirm anything,and the xbox was no like a PC you could not install games on IT.

And by the way it says nothing about HDD directly.

In fact The PS2 was unveil in september 1999 and release 6 months latter,but development begin way before 1999,by that time the platform was already made,so trying to imply that sony came with the idea in 1999 is a joke by 1999 the platform was already make and with a slot on the back to fit an HDD.

You can argue till your head pops but the fact remains that Xbox is the first console to integrate a hard drive and that integration changed console gaming forever.

Yep...... by allowing developers to patch games which has ultimately lead to the "release a broken game and patch later" crap that we have today.

Avatar image for i_p_daily
#171 Posted by I_P_Daily (9468 posts) -

@Chutebox said:
@i_p_daily said:

@knight-k: This thread and the X thread prove that your fanbase are the losers, even when your fanbase is winning you act like losers.

Worst fanbase in gaming history confirmed.

Bud, do you honestly think you are any better?

Sure, what about you? you are always the cow sympathiser.

The proof is in this very thread as if it were a PC mag saying the same thing about the PS4 it wouldn't even hit 3 pages, but because its about Xbox its at 4 pages and counting.

Any small piece of good publicity for Xbox is like a red rag to cows LMAO.

Avatar image for deactivated-5c18005f903a1
#172 Posted by deactivated-5c18005f903a1 (4627 posts) -

@scatteh316 said:
@Pedro said:
@tormentos said:

Nice try LINK me to 1998 talk of the xbox as i linked you to sony PUBLICLY claiming HDD,not on some obscure room where no one can confirm anything,and the xbox was no like a PC you could not install games on IT.

And by the way it says nothing about HDD directly.

In fact The PS2 was unveil in september 1999 and release 6 months latter,but development begin way before 1999,by that time the platform was already made,so trying to imply that sony came with the idea in 1999 is a joke by 1999 the platform was already make and with a slot on the back to fit an HDD.

You can argue till your head pops but the fact remains that Xbox is the first console to integrate a hard drive and that integration changed console gaming forever.

Yep...... by allowing developers to patch games which has ultimately lead to the "release a broken game and patch later" crap that we have today.

That implies that prior to this every game was a perfectly finished work of art with zero bugs, glitches or issues. Which we all know is not true at all. At least it is possible to fix them now. And not having to shell out on Sony's and Nintendos over priced memory card more than made up for the odd patch in my opinion.

Avatar image for scatteh316
#173 Posted by scatteh316 (9956 posts) -
@boycie said:
@scatteh316 said:
@Pedro said:
@tormentos said:

Nice try LINK me to 1998 talk of the xbox as i linked you to sony PUBLICLY claiming HDD,not on some obscure room where no one can confirm anything,and the xbox was no like a PC you could not install games on IT.

And by the way it says nothing about HDD directly.

In fact The PS2 was unveil in september 1999 and release 6 months latter,but development begin way before 1999,by that time the platform was already made,so trying to imply that sony came with the idea in 1999 is a joke by 1999 the platform was already make and with a slot on the back to fit an HDD.

You can argue till your head pops but the fact remains that Xbox is the first console to integrate a hard drive and that integration changed console gaming forever.

Yep...... by allowing developers to patch games which has ultimately lead to the "release a broken game and patch later" crap that we have today.

That implies that prior to this every game was a perfectly finished work of art with zero bugs, glitches or issues. Which we all know is not true at all. At least it is possible to fix them now. And not having to shell out on Sony's and Nintendos over priced memory card more than made up for the odd patch in my opinion.

Sigh..... or maybe it just implies games before were not released broken and full of problems like they are today..

/smh

Avatar image for deactivated-5c18005f903a1
#174 Posted by deactivated-5c18005f903a1 (4627 posts) -

@scatteh316: games were also not as complicated to make as they are today.

Avatar image for scatteh316
#175 Posted by scatteh316 (9956 posts) -
@boycie said:

@scatteh316: games were also not as complicated to make as they are today.

Yes they were.

Avatar image for deactivated-5c18005f903a1
#176 Posted by deactivated-5c18005f903a1 (4627 posts) -

@scatteh316: I’ll have to bow down to your expertise on this. I’m just an armchair expert with no real knowledge on how games are made posting overly simplistic conclusions.

Avatar image for scatteh316
#177 Posted by scatteh316 (9956 posts) -
@boycie said:

@scatteh316: I’ll have to bow down to your expertise on this. I’m just an armchair expert with no real knowledge on how games are made posting overly simplistic conclusions.

I think you do need to sit down..... the amount of stupid coming from you just lately is scary.

The hardware at any given point in time was still cutting edge at that time and still required the same amount of learning, skill and knowledge as todays games do.

Although the older hardware was a lot more unique and required a greater depth of understanding then today's hardware.

Not to mention today's GPU's and CPU have software and debugging hardware far more advanced then what they had back then.

Unless you're going to explain how making a PS2 game was not as complicated as making one for PS4?

Avatar image for deactivated-5c18005f903a1
#178 Posted by deactivated-5c18005f903a1 (4627 posts) -

@scatteh316: there would be no point as I would just be guessing. Just easier to blame lazy devs or something.

Avatar image for SecretPolice
#179 Posted by SecretPolice (34189 posts) -

Unholy cowzerz are they pissed... .... Good stuff. lol :P

Avatar image for ni6htmare01
#180 Posted by ni6htmare01 (3602 posts) -

I lol that the soon will be the last place console should be the standard.. I mean WTF??

Avatar image for tormentos
#181 Edited by tormentos (28017 posts) -

@Pedro said:

The fact remains that the Xbox is the FIRST console to have an hard-drive integrated. It was factually never done before. It is also the FIRST console to use a hard-drive for gamesaves. Your attempt to dance around this is comical.

The PS2 HDD support was 3 years late(2004) in the US and had practically NO support thus the reason Sony dropped support for it early in its life. You literally CANNOT purchase an Xbox without an hard-drive in the same manner you cannot purchase a modern console without a hard-drive. Don't rewrite the past because you don't like it.

While you are monkeying around on a unused features, list the games that you can install on the PS2 hard-drive outside of FFXI. :)

1-I never dispute that,but that is like saying the PS controller was the first controller with integrated rumble,and 2 analogues.But then again i always see fanboys credit nintendo for it,even when the N64 rumble was sold apart unlike on the dualshock,or how it had 2 analogues.

2-Wrong again..Hahahahaaaaaaa

Capcom vs. SNK 2.

Feature game saves and install on the PS2 HDD and was release on november 6 2001 before the xbox was even launch.

So even on that the PS2 beat it as well,obviously it can't compare to the xbox version which have saves for all games,but then again that wasn't my argument.

I am not dancing around anything,you are since my argument never was who came with it standard,but who was first to it,the PS2 predates the xbox by 20 months on march 2000 a time where the xbox was just spec (in fact which changed they were tuned down GPU wise) already the PS2 had a slot in the back for its HDD.

3-There is no rewriting stop grasping dude,the PS2 had HDD since 2001 before the xbox was even launch US mean total shit in the big scheme of things to the purpose of this argument so nice try the PS2 got HDD first and used saves first to a HDD first as well,MS version was better? Hell yes and was centralized,but they just cashed in on someone else idea like Sony did with rumble which is now STANDARD built in,and just like analogues are now 2 on controllers and how they are clickable Which again was done by sony first as well.

My argument wasn't whos implementation was better and more centralize,fact is MS version WAS and i am not denying that,who did it first yeah sony did.

Avatar image for Pedro
#182 Posted by Pedro (32147 posts) -

@tormentos said:
@Pedro said:

The fact remains that the Xbox is the FIRST console to have an hard-drive integrated. It was factually never done before. It is also the FIRST console to use a hard-drive for gamesaves. Your attempt to dance around this is comical.

The PS2 HDD support was 3 years late(2004) in the US and had practically NO support thus the reason Sony dropped support for it early in its life. You literally CANNOT purchase an Xbox without an hard-drive in the same manner you cannot purchase a modern console without a hard-drive. Don't rewrite the past because you don't like it.

While you are monkeying around on a unused features, list the games that you can install on the PS2 hard-drive outside of FFXI. :)

1-I never dispute that,but that is like saying the PS controller was the first controller with integrated rumble,and 2 analogues.But then again i always see fanboys credit nintendo for it,even when the N64 rumble was sold apart unlike on the dualshock,or how it had 2 analogues.

2-Wrong again..Hahahahaaaaaaa

Capcom vs. SNK 2.

Feature game saves and install on the PS2 HDD and was release on november 6 2001 before the xbox was even launch.

So even on that the PS2 beat it as well,obviously it can't compare to the xbox version which have saves for all games,but then again that wasn't my argument.

I am not dancing around anything,you are since my argument never was who came with it standard,but who was first to it,the PS2 predates the xbox by 20 months on march 2000 a time where the xbox was just spec (in fact which changed they were tuned down GPU wise) already the PS2 had a slot in the back for its HDD.

3-There is no rewriting stop grasping dude,the PS2 had HDD since 2001 before the xbox was even launch US mean total shit in the big scheme of things to the purpose of this argument so nice try the PS2 got HDD first and used saves first to a HDD first as well,MS version was better? Hell yes and was centralized,but they just cashed in on someone else idea like Sony did with rumble which is now STANDARD built in,and just like analogues are now 2 on controllers and how they are clickable Which again was done by sony first as well.

My argument wasn't whos implementation was better and more centralize,fact is MS version WAS and i am not denying that,who did it first yeah sony did.

All of that babble cannot negate the false claim you made that MS stole HDD from Sony which is simply not true. You continue to dance around the fact that the Xbox is the first console to have a hard-drive integrated. This has nothing to do with who implemented best or who used a hard-drive first but the console that was the FIRST to integrate a hard-drive. But you are so hardcore into fanboy mode that you just spewing shit hoping something sticks. Critical thinking would be your friend. Its also comical that "the US mean total shit in the big scheme of things", when the US is still the largest single market for gaming.

Avatar image for Chutebox
#183 Posted by Chutebox (44056 posts) -

@i_p_daily: I'm sympathizing with them by calling them losers? Haha. Nah.

Like I said, you do the same shit as them. I'm not saying all lems, you.

Avatar image for shellcase86
#184 Posted by shellcase86 (4122 posts) -

PS4 owner and I'd agree. Would love to see Sony stick to games first and foremost, but some of the X1's features should be adopted/made standard.

Avatar image for Steppy_76
#185 Posted by Steppy_76 (2378 posts) -

@tormentos said:
@Pedro said:

You made a false claim that MS stole the hard-drive from Sony. Consider "fallowing" your own claims. The PS2 hard-drive implementation was not core to the system thus the reason it was a shitty add-on with almost non existent support. Xbox being not only the first to include a hard-drive but the first console to eliminate the need for memory cards and utilize the hard drive for faster loading of games.

"The PlayStation 2 Hard Disk Drive (PS2 HDD) was released on July 19, 2001 in Japan (together with the Network Adaptor) and on March 23, 2004 in North America."

As for you other babble, that has nothing to do with what I am calling you out on.

Which does nothing to change the fact that SONY DID IT FIRST,if we talk about support the xbox had shit,you simply could not install games on it,in that regard the PS2 had it beat at least some games could be installed.

So basically for installs which is what HDD are mainly use today the xbox had zero support,so basically was a cosmethical integration that could not install retail games at all. That for me is halfassed support as well.

@Steppy_76 said:

Every game cached data to the xbox harddrive it didn't need larger installs because they put a faster DVD drive in it. It was standard in every unit and every game used it. Without it bundled Sonys hdd got vitually no support. Once again every single game used the xbox drive. It was a fundamental part of the system. Sonys ended up making the ps2 more expensive than the xbox and still lacking most of the features. Please...next thing you'll be claiming is xbl was a copy of psn

Using the HDD for cache mean crap,you could not install games PERIOD or run them for the HDD which i may add was 8GB.

Is not about faster DVD the PS2 used streaming tech,which is how GTA has so big levels without actually needing to load while you were driving.

The xbox HDD had no support for game installs,which is what HDD are use today and how PC has work since forever.

Sony didn't make the PS2 more expensive,in fact the PS2 cost sony to make way less than what it cost MS to make an xbox,lets not ignore that the xbox had a DVD drive but didn't allow you to watch dvd movies unless you added a remote controls which unlocked the feature and was extra,and you also need it $50 a year for online as well.

The PS2 drive was $99 dollars and came with 1 game,and it was 40GB, compare that to the 360 much latter HDD that was 20GB and $99 without any games.

Na they had friend list and voice chat universal that was MS,and charged you $50 for P2P while socom ran on dedicated servers and online play on PS2 was free.

The entire purpose of "installs" is to copy files from a slower medium(optical drive) to a faster one (HDD). Every game on the xbox would cache commonly used files to the HDD to speed up load times. The xbox would keep the data for the last 8 games you played as well. The faster optical drive of the xbox allowed for this to be done on the fly and not NEED a permanent install.

It IS about faster optical drives. Games didn't need to do large installs because the faster DVD drive negated the need to load all that on to the hard drive. Even with games installed on the HDD drive it merely helped bring the FEW games that could do it reduce load times to xbox levels. There was no "special tech" that allowed for streaming, that was a software technique of loading things outside of your area before you got to the area. It literally has nothing to do with the point you are trying to make.

The xbox and PS2 were the same price. Once you added in the 99$ HDD it made the PS2 more expensive than the xbox and still underpowered and underperforming. Even if you add the dvd remote(which has nothing to do with game functions) it was still cheaper than the PS2/HDD combo.

Wanna compare the number of online games between the systems? There WAS no PS2 online service, each publisher was responsible for maintaining their own servers and functionality varied from game to game with no set standards as to what they had to support.

Avatar image for joshrmeyer
#186 Posted by JoshRMeyer (10057 posts) -

I stopped after the "allow me to make a very important statement: I do not own an Xbox One." This guy can't afford or care to spend $200 and somehow gets the job of writing an article about it? Riiight.

Avatar image for Steppy_76
#187 Posted by Steppy_76 (2378 posts) -

@tormentos said:

1-I never dispute that,but that is like saying the PS controller was the first controller with integrated rumble,and 2 analogues.But then again i always see fanboys credit nintendo for it,even when the N64 rumble was sold apart unlike on the dualshock,or how it had 2 analogues.

2-Wrong again..Hahahahaaaaaaa

Capcom vs. SNK 2.

Feature game saves and install on the PS2 HDD and was release on november 6 2001 before the xbox was even launch.

So even on that the PS2 beat it as well,obviously it can't compare to the xbox version which have saves for all games,but then again that wasn't my argument.

I am not dancing around anything,you are since my argument never was who came with it standard,but who was first to it,the PS2 predates the xbox by 20 months on march 2000 a time where the xbox was just spec (in fact which changed they were tuned down GPU wise) already the PS2 had a slot in the back for its HDD.

3-There is no rewriting stop grasping dude,the PS2 had HDD since 2001 before the xbox was even launch US mean total shit in the big scheme of things to the purpose of this argument so nice try the PS2 got HDD first and used saves first to a HDD first as well,MS version was better? Hell yes and was centralized,but they just cashed in on someone else idea like Sony did with rumble which is now STANDARD built in,and just like analogues are now 2 on controllers and how they are clickable Which again was done by sony first as well.

My argument wasn't whos implementation was better and more centralize,fact is MS version WAS and i am not denying that,who did it first yeah sony did.

1. That's because the function of the rumble was the same even if the implemention was different

2. The first game to do it was a MULTIPLATFORM THIRD PARTY game that released a week before the xbox came out, yet you won't be able to draw the conclusion that it was work on the Xbox version that they carried over to the PS2 version.

3. You do know that the drive bay wasn't in those initial PS2s either right? That didn't come in until april 2001, 13 months after PS2 launch and 3 months the xbox was officially unveiled(and the xbox was one of the worst kept secrets during development prior to "official" announcement).

Avatar image for ronvalencia
#188 Edited by ronvalencia (26541 posts) -

@tormentos said:
@Pedro said:

The fact remains that the Xbox is the FIRST console to have an hard-drive integrated. It was factually never done before. It is also the FIRST console to use a hard-drive for gamesaves. Your attempt to dance around this is comical.

The PS2 HDD support was 3 years late(2004) in the US and had practically NO support thus the reason Sony dropped support for it early in its life. You literally CANNOT purchase an Xbox without an hard-drive in the same manner you cannot purchase a modern console without a hard-drive. Don't rewrite the past because you don't like it.

While you are monkeying around on a unused features, list the games that you can install on the PS2 hard-drive outside of FFXI. :)

1-I never dispute that,but that is like saying the PS controller was the first controller with integrated rumble,and 2 analogues.But then again i always see fanboys credit nintendo for it,even when the N64 rumble was sold apart unlike on the dualshock,or how it had 2 analogues.

2-Wrong again..Hahahahaaaaaaa

Capcom vs. SNK 2.

Feature game saves and install on the PS2 HDD and was release on november 6 2001 before the xbox was even launch.

So even on that the PS2 beat it as well,obviously it can't compare to the xbox version which have saves for all games,but then again that wasn't my argument.

I am not dancing around anything,you are since my argument never was who came with it standard,but who was first to it,the PS2 predates the xbox by 20 months on march 2000 a time where the xbox was just spec (in fact which changed they were tuned down GPU wise) already the PS2 had a slot in the back for its HDD.

3-There is no rewriting stop grasping dude,the PS2 had HDD since 2001 before the xbox was even launch US mean total shit in the big scheme of things to the purpose of this argument so nice try the PS2 got HDD first and used saves first to a HDD first as well,MS version was better? Hell yes and was centralized,but they just cashed in on someone else idea like Sony did with rumble which is now STANDARD built in,and just like analogues are now 2 on controllers and how they are clickable Which again was done by sony first as well.

My argument wasn't whos implementation was better and more centralize,fact is MS version WAS and i am not denying that,who did it first yeah sony did.

Original Xbox is just a garden walled x86 PC with non-gaming Windows NT services removed.

MS-DOS PC enables the programmer to "hit the metal", hence the reason for modern PC hardware supporting VGA legacy. MS-DOS PC supports hard disk since MS DOS 2.0 i.e. year 1983.

Original Xbox's iGPU has second vertex shader pipeline which doesn't exist on GeForce 3. ATI Radeon 8500 (Aug 2001) already has second vertex shaders but the drivers are half-ass'ed. Original Xbox's chipset is part of PC's nForce chipset family. Bill Gates overrides Xbox Team's AMD K7 Duron choice with Pentium III-Coppermine/Celeron 128KB L2 solution. Bill Gates protects Intel.

GeForce 4 Ti (NV25) was launched in February 2002 with two vertex shader pipelines.

nForce 220 for AMD K7 arrived similar time with OG Xbox's release. Both PC and Xbox has NV's SoundStorm DSP.

Original Xbox''s BIOS could be considered a precursor to EFI.

Avatar image for i_p_daily
#190 Posted by I_P_Daily (9468 posts) -

@Chutebox said:

@i_p_daily: I'm sympathizing with them by calling them losers? Haha. Nah.

Like I said, you do the same shit as them. I'm not saying all lems, you.

So you're trying to say that I go into meltdown mode when there is positive PS4 news???

Nah you got me mixed up with someone else, I make fun of cows as its entertaining, not meltdown because someone says something positive about PS4. Get it right dude.

Avatar image for i_p_daily
#191 Posted by I_P_Daily (9468 posts) -

@joshrmeyer said:

I stopped after the "allow me to make a very important statement: I do not own an Xbox One." This guy can't afford or care to spend $200 and somehow gets the job of writing an article about it? Riiight.

Well cow are resident Xbox experts here even though they don't own one and they write essay's about it everyday lol.

Avatar image for zappat
#192 Posted by Zappat (1282 posts) -
@i_p_daily said:
@Chutebox said:

@i_p_daily: I'm sympathizing with them by calling them losers? Haha. Nah.

Like I said, you do the same shit as them. I'm not saying all lems, you.

So you're trying to say that I go into meltdown mode when there is positive PS4 news???

Nah you got me mixed up with someone else, I make fun of cows as its entertaining, not meltdown because someone says something positive about PS4. Get it right dude.

Of course you do, frequently. A fast search in Google for example got me this

https://www.gamespot.com/forums/system-wars-314159282/is-it-fair-to-say-sony-is-winning-the-vr-war-33420430/?page=1

You're always jumping in PS4 threads and showing your butthurt.

Avatar image for HalcyonScarlet
#193 Posted by HalcyonScarlet (8234 posts) -

@tormentos said:
@Pedro said:

You can argue till your head pops but the fact remains that Xbox is the first console to integrate a hard drive and that integration changed console gaming forever.

Oh i never argued that the xbox was the first console to come with an hdd integrated.

You need to learn to fallow arguments,mine is about who ideas was and who used it first.

lol they didn't change anything the xbox didn't allow you to install games until way after sony allowed you to,and sony was the first to have an HDD,the HDD on PS2 predates the xbox release.lol

Just like cross play on PS2 predates even xbox live. :)

I think it's the wrong way of looking at it. Didn't PS2 use a HDD for a different purpose, to support it's online feature? And Xbox was like the PS3, where it partially installed certain games, that was the HDDs function I think, it was only 8GBs if I remember. Not all games needed an install, but many did.

Even now, when you put Xbox Original NGB in the Xbox 360, it has to partially install it. So the first time you play it, it loads quite slowly while it's copying, then the next few times it's much faster.

Neither of them invented the HDD or the use of it. But I think MS took their cues from PC development and how the PC used and benefited from a HDD rather than, just because Sony decided to have a HDD bay in their console.

-

But the idea that other consoles should imitate Xbox or MSs business ideas is just cringy, I can't even laugh at the idea.

Avatar image for tormentos
#194 Edited by tormentos (28017 posts) -

@Pedro said:

All of that babble cannot negate the false claim you made that MS stole HDD from Sony which is simply not true. You continue to dance around the fact that the Xbox is the first console to have a hard-drive integrated. This has nothing to do with who implemented best or who used a hard-drive first but the console that was the FIRST to integrate a hard-drive. But you are so hardcore into fanboy mode that you just spewing shit hoping something sticks. Critical thinking would be your friend. Its also comical that "the US mean total shit in the big scheme of things", when the US is still the largest single market for gaming.

Again when you QUOTE MS saying before sony that they would make the xbox with HDD you will have a point.By 1999 the PS2 was done and SHOWN it carry a hole in the back for its HDD which release in 2001 before the xbox was even launch.

And used the HDD for saves before the xbox even launch.

Bullshit MS took an idea from sony and capitalize on it,just like they added a DVD drive,just like they added 2 analogues to their controller,rumble built in how come they didn't do like sega or like nintendo just 1 analogue and rumble as addon? How come they did it like sony.?

Yeah They try to mimic the PS so hard it wasn't even funny,again i have no problem admitting their implementation was more centralise and BETTER,but the idea wasn't their period they stole it.

@boycie said:

That implies that prior to this every game was a perfectly finished work of art with zero bugs, glitches or issues. Which we all know is not true at all. At least it is possible to fix them now. And not having to shell out on Sony's and Nintendos over priced memory card more than made up for the odd patch in my opinion.

Games weren't perfect but were finished and went through a much tougher process because once the game was out it was out there was nothing you could do to fix it,gameplay breaking bugs were RARE.

Now is a norm to release shitty un finish games and patch them,so true is this that you see even day 1 patches,nothing better than wanting to play your game as soon as you get it and get stop by a damn 10GB patch.

The xbox also sold over price memory card and even sold you a damn remote to be able top watch DVD movies,you could not see movies on xbox unless you pay MS an extra $30 for their dvd remote which was total bullshit.

Then come xbox live which was freaking $50 a YEAR on a time where online play was free everywhere on the planet but on xbox.

I find stupid and moronic to cry about prices of memory cards when MS started charging $50 dollars for P2P gameplay.

Is like complaining about cross play,when the other platform in question doesn't even allow free to play games to be play free..lol

@Steppy_76 said:

The entire purpose of "installs" is to copy files from a slower medium(optical drive) to a faster one (HDD). Every game on the xbox would cache commonly used files to the HDD to speed up load times. The xbox would keep the data for the last 8 games you played as well. The faster optical drive of the xbox allowed for this to be done on the fly and not NEED a permanent install.

It IS about faster optical drives. Games didn't need to do large installs because the faster DVD drive negated the need to load all that on to the hard drive. Even with games installed on the HDD drive it merely helped bring the FEW games that could do it reduce load times to xbox levels. There was no "special tech" that allowed for streaming, that was a software technique of loading things outside of your area before you got to the area. It literally has nothing to do with the point you are trying to make.

The xbox and PS2 were the same price. Once you added in the 99$ HDD it made the PS2 more expensive than the xbox and still underpowered and underperforming. Even if you add the dvd remote(which has nothing to do with game functions) it was still cheaper than the PS2/HDD combo.

Wanna compare the number of online games between the systems? There WAS no PS2 online service, each publisher was responsible for maintaining their own servers and functionality varied from game to game with no set standards as to what they had to support.

Cache gaming and installing are 2 different things.

Yes it does because they found out that constantly streaming data outside of the disk was better than just trying to load a single part then pause to load another section.

Is the reason why MGS4 was mess up vs how other games like Uncharted look even better and did not need those constant installs and changes.

So yeah streaming whas a way to help,and carry on from PS2 to PS3 as well.

Yes but the HDD wasn't stand alone it came with a game which otherwise was $50,so basically it was $50 more than an xbox,but then again xbox live blown the price of the xbox by $200 more in just 5 years,and to watch movies you need it a dvd remote,and worse they also sold memory cards because on those days actually taking your saves with you was a thing,with a HDD alone you could not take your make character and bring it to a friends home,but with a memory card you could.

So please don't cry about price MS was charging you $50 for P2P.

The PS4 HDD was 40GB with FF11 for $99 dollars,the xbox 360 HDD was 20GB with nothing,so you can easily see the price was right.

By the way the HDD was one of the causes of the xbox sudden death by the way,stated by Peter Moore it self.

What MS try to do what offer everything sony was going to sell free,but charge for yearly for things sony was giving free.

It cost them 4 billions even with xbox live winnings,it didn't pay off which is why they the very next gen make the HDD optional,MS try to bough its way into the market and failed,it would have been impossible for sony to pack an HDD and have profist for the PS2.

Oh and since you deviated to power,that mean total shit when you compare the GIGANTIC amount of games on PS2 vs the xbox,it wasn't even freaking close if you were a gamer and you didn't own a PS2 you simple were no gamer period.

The PS2 was compatible with thousands of games from the PS1,and the PS2 itself had more games than the xbox and Dreamcast combined.

So power really mean shit when you lack games,Halo simple didn't cover it all.

There was as standard on xbox is was voice chat across all games and friend list that was about it,fact is the system was P2P,while most games on PS2 used dedicated servers,i don't care if EA or sony control the servers,they were servers while the xbox had P2P.

Worse EA wasn't bound by xbox live,which prompted a fight between MS and EA,because MS wanted EA to pass their games through xbox live,and EA wanted to keep using its own servers.

What happen? Yeah all it took was a 1 year were all EA games came with online play on PS2 while the xbox version went offline for MS to allow EA to run their own servers,to this day EA games run on their own servers no MS,Titanfall was just a deal to hype the so call cloud.

E3 2003: EA/PS2 ONLINE EXCLUSIVITY

  • FIFA Soccer 2004
  • Madden NFL 2004
  • NASCAR Thunder 2004
  • NBA Live 2004
  • NCAA Football 2004
  • NCAA March Madness 2004
  • NHL 2004
  • Tiger Woods PGA Tour 2004

https://www.ign.com/articles/2003/05/13/e3-2003-eaps2-online-exclusivity

The PS2 had many online games,and as factual note there were more online players on PS2 than on xbox live back then as well.

In those times there was no services,sega didn't have it either,yet they have online and cross play,sony again as well had cross play,yet it was MS the one with the so call SERVICE the one without cross play their fans had to wait until the next gen to experience it,and they got access to FF11 which PC gamers and PS2 gamers were playing already for years.

So the whole Service mean total crap,when sony was delivering cross play,games on dedicated servers and MS with its $50 a year service wasn't delivering either.

Avatar image for deactivated-5c18005f903a1
#195 Posted by deactivated-5c18005f903a1 (4627 posts) -

@tormentos: Tell me... have you ever been wrong about anything?

Avatar image for Steppy_76
#197 Posted by Steppy_76 (2378 posts) -

@tormentos said:
@Pedro said:

All of that babble cannot negate the false claim you made that MS stole HDD from Sony which is simply not true. You continue to dance around the fact that the Xbox is the first console to have a hard-drive integrated. This has nothing to do with who implemented best or who used a hard-drive first but the console that was the FIRST to integrate a hard-drive. But you are so hardcore into fanboy mode that you just spewing shit hoping something sticks. Critical thinking would be your friend. Its also comical that "the US mean total shit in the big scheme of things", when the US is still the largest single market for gaming.

Again when you QUOTE MS saying before sony that they would make the xbox with HDD you will have a point.By 1999 the PS2 was done and SHOWN it carry a hole in the back for its HDD which release in 2001 before the xbox was even launch.

And used the HDD for saves before the xbox even launch.

Bullshit MS took an idea from sony and capitalize on it,just like they added a DVD drive,just like they added 2 analogues to their controller,rumble built in how come they didn't do like sega or like nintendo just 1 analogue and rumble as addon? How come they did it like sony.?

Yeah They try to mimic the PS so hard it wasn't even funny,again i have no problem admitting their implementation was more centralise and BETTER,but the idea wasn't their period they stole it.

@boycie said:

That implies that prior to this every game was a perfectly finished work of art with zero bugs, glitches or issues. Which we all know is not true at all. At least it is possible to fix them now. And not having to shell out on Sony's and Nintendos over priced memory card more than made up for the odd patch in my opinion.

Games weren't perfect but were finished and went through a much tougher process because once the game was out it was out there was nothing you could do to fix it,gameplay breaking bugs were RARE.

Now is a norm to release shitty un finish games and patch them,so true is this that you see even day 1 patches,nothing better than wanting to play your game as soon as you get it and get stop by a damn 10GB patch.

The xbox also sold over price memory card and even sold you a damn remote to be able top watch DVD movies,you could not see movies on xbox unless you pay MS an extra $30 for their dvd remote which was total bullshit.

Then come xbox live which was freaking $50 a YEAR on a time where online play was free everywhere on the planet but on xbox.

I find stupid and moronic to cry about prices of memory cards when MS started charging $50 dollars for P2P gameplay.

Is like complaining about cross play,when the other platform in question doesn't even allow free to play games to be play free..lol

@Steppy_76 said:

The entire purpose of "installs" is to copy files from a slower medium(optical drive) to a faster one (HDD). Every game on the xbox would cache commonly used files to the HDD to speed up load times. The xbox would keep the data for the last 8 games you played as well. The faster optical drive of the xbox allowed for this to be done on the fly and not NEED a permanent install.

It IS about faster optical drives. Games didn't need to do large installs because the faster DVD drive negated the need to load all that on to the hard drive. Even with games installed on the HDD drive it merely helped bring the FEW games that could do it reduce load times to xbox levels. There was no "special tech" that allowed for streaming, that was a software technique of loading things outside of your area before you got to the area. It literally has nothing to do with the point you are trying to make.

The xbox and PS2 were the same price. Once you added in the 99$ HDD it made the PS2 more expensive than the xbox and still underpowered and underperforming. Even if you add the dvd remote(which has nothing to do with game functions) it was still cheaper than the PS2/HDD combo.

Wanna compare the number of online games between the systems? There WAS no PS2 online service, each publisher was responsible for maintaining their own servers and functionality varied from game to game with no set standards as to what they had to support.

Cache gaming and installing are 2 different things.

Yes it does because they found out that constantly streaming data outside of the disk was better than just trying to load a single part then pause to load another section.

Is the reason why MGS4 was mess up vs how other games like Uncharted look even better and did not need those constant installs and changes.

So yeah streaming whas a way to help,and carry on from PS2 to PS3 as well.

Yes but the HDD wasn't stand alone it came with a game which otherwise was $50,so basically it was $50 more than an xbox,but then again xbox live blown the price of the xbox by $200 more in just 5 years,and to watch movies you need it a dvd remote,and worse they also sold memory cards because on those days actually taking your saves with you was a thing,with a HDD alone you could not take your make character and bring it to a friends home,but with a memory card you could.

So please don't cry about price MS was charging you $50 for P2P.

The PS4 HDD was 40GB with FF11 for $99 dollars,the xbox 360 HDD was 20GB with nothing,so you can easily see the price was right.

By the way the HDD was one of the causes of the xbox sudden death by the way,stated by Peter Moore it self.

What MS try to do what offer everything sony was going to sell free,but charge for yearly for things sony was giving free.

It cost them 4 billions even with xbox live winnings,it didn't pay off which is why they the very next gen make the HDD optional,MS try to bough its way into the market and failed,it would have been impossible for sony to pack an HDD and have profist for the PS2.

Oh and since you deviated to power,that mean total shit when you compare the GIGANTIC amount of games on PS2 vs the xbox,it wasn't even freaking close if you were a gamer and you didn't own a PS2 you simple were no gamer period.

The PS2 was compatible with thousands of games from the PS1,and the PS2 itself had more games than the xbox and Dreamcast combined.

So power really mean shit when you lack games,Halo simple didn't cover it all.

There was as standard on xbox is was voice chat across all games and friend list that was about it,fact is the system was P2P,while most games on PS2 used dedicated servers,i don't care if EA or sony control the servers,they were servers while the xbox had P2P.

Worse EA wasn't bound by xbox live,which prompted a fight between MS and EA,because MS wanted EA to pass their games through xbox live,and EA wanted to keep using its own servers.

What happen? Yeah all it took was a 1 year were all EA games came with online play on PS2 while the xbox version went offline for MS to allow EA to run their own servers,to this day EA games run on their own servers no MS,Titanfall was just a deal to hype the so call cloud.

E3 2003: EA/PS2 ONLINE EXCLUSIVITY

  • FIFA Soccer 2004
  • Madden NFL 2004
  • NASCAR Thunder 2004
  • NBA Live 2004
  • NCAA Football 2004
  • NCAA March Madness 2004
  • NHL 2004
  • Tiger Woods PGA Tour 2004

https://www.ign.com/articles/2003/05/13/e3-2003-eaps2-online-exclusivity

The PS2 had many online games,and as factual note there were more online players on PS2 than on xbox live back then as well.

In those times there was no services,sega didn't have it either,yet they have online and cross play,sony again as well had cross play,yet it was MS the one with the so call SERVICE the one without cross play their fans had to wait until the next gen to experience it,and they got access to FF11 which PC gamers and PS2 gamers were playing already for years.

So the whole Service mean total crap,when sony was delivering cross play,games on dedicated servers and MS with its $50 a year service wasn't delivering either.

The original xbox was announced in march of 2000 in a expected announcement at GDC 2000. Sony may well have thought of it first, I don't know for sure , but there is evidence of the xbox being in development well before this, and before Sony's HDD announcement.

I do like how you removed the part where I mentioned the first game to use save was a multiplat game released 1 week later on the xbox when it launched. A rational person would be able to infer that it was work from the xbox version being developed at the SAME time. You probably just think it was a coincidence though right?

Did anyone state anything about the controller design? No, they didn't...although they did move the analog input into primary placement on the controller which everyone OTHER than Sony has followed suite with. Why didn't they use cartridges? Because tech had moved past that point. All the other things were stuff all the previous gen consoles had and it wouldn't make sense to release a next gen console without those features. A console has to have an input device, a storage device, a processing unit with display output. There are only so many ways to do that.

You think games are buggier due to the ability to be patched? You don't think it has anything to do with games growing from several megabytes to several gigabytes? There were games that were buggy released previously, and then you're right you didn't have a patch day 1. You were simply stuck with a buggy game that was never going to get better.

The xbox did have overpriced memory cards, but you didn't NEED it, and most xbox users NEVER had one. With Sony's PS2 you NEEDED them even after the HDD released. 30 bucks for 8 megs of memory when nonproprietary memory cards offered 10 times the space(or more as time went on)...hmm that's a tactic sony still uses to this day.

What does movies have to do with a game machine? MS wasn't paying the DVD license fee for everybody whether they used the movie playback or not(money that went to including the HDD drive in the box) and they had no incentive to actively push DVD like Sony did.

People who didn't play online didn't have to pay those fees did they? EVERYBODY who used a PS2 needed the memory card, and everybody still hates it.

You know what, I'm done. You believe what you wanna believe, I'll believe what I and the rest of the industry wants to believe. You are gonna just come back with a list of things that nobody said, bring up new things that are not germane to the conversation and it's not worth it.

Avatar image for joshrmeyer
#198 Posted by JoshRMeyer (10057 posts) -

@i_p_daily: True but we aren't telling people it's the best console and to go out and buy one. I mean, seriously, the guy should own one if he's gonna tout about the system and tell ne it's the best and I should get one. As he's a PC gamer, I get why he likes the Xbox One: He can play all the games on PC without having to buy one lol.

Avatar image for tormentos
#199 Posted by tormentos (28017 posts) -

@Steppy_76 said:

The original xbox was announced in march of 2000 in a expected announcement at GDC 2000. Sony may well have thought of it first, I don't know for sure , but there is evidence of the xbox being in development well before this, and before Sony's HDD announcement.

I do like how you removed the part where I mentioned the first game to use save was a multiplat game released 1 week later on the xbox when it launched. A rational person would be able to infer that it was work from the xbox version being developed at the SAME time. You probably just think it was a coincidence though right?

Did anyone state anything about the controller design? No, they didn't...although they did move the analog input into primary placement on the controller which everyone OTHER than Sony has followed suite with. Why didn't they use cartridges? Because tech had moved past that point. All the other things were stuff all the previous gen consoles had and it wouldn't make sense to release a next gen console without those features. A console has to have an input device, a storage device, a processing unit with display output. There are only so many ways to do that.

You think games are buggier due to the ability to be patched? You don't think it has anything to do with games growing from several megabytes to several gigabytes? There were games that were buggy released previously, and then you're right you didn't have a patch day 1. You were simply stuck with a buggy game that was never going to get better.

The xbox did have overpriced memory cards, but you didn't NEED it, and most xbox users NEVER had one. With Sony's PS2 you NEEDED them even after the HDD released. 30 bucks for 8 megs of memory when nonproprietary memory cards offered 10 times the space(or more as time went on)...hmm that's a tactic sony still uses to this day.

What does movies have to do with a game machine? MS wasn't paying the DVD license fee for everybody whether they used the movie playback or not(money that went to including the HDD drive in the box) and they had no incentive to actively push DVD like Sony did.

People who didn't play online didn't have to pay those fees did they? EVERYBODY who used a PS2 needed the memory card, and everybody still hates it.

You know what, I'm done. You believe what you wanna believe, I'll believe what I and the rest of the industry wants to believe. You are gonna just come back with a list of things that nobody said, bring up new things that are not germane to the conversation and it's not worth it.

1-NO which is why there is no link to it,sony PUBLICLY claimed they would release an HDD add one for its consoles on 1999 and by that time the consoles was already make,it was finish and was shown by the way,so the development cycle and the idea would go back year probably to 1996 97,and considering sony starter work on Cell in 2001 basically a year after the PS2 was launch that tell the whole story about how sony did things and how much time they put into their platforms.

There is no evidence on MS claiming they will jump into the console market with a console that had an HDD,the PS2 was release on march 4 2000 the xbox was unveil on march 10 out of nowhere in a move that took even Sega by surprise which MS develop some tools for the dreamcast,but it was clear it was just an announcement as the console didn't make it for another 20 months unlike the PS2.

2-Hahahahahaahaa What a liar get your facts right,SNK vs capcom 2 released on PS2 on November 6 2001,on xbox it released on February 2003..hahahahahaa

So your whole assumption that the PS2 version used the HDD for saves,because it was been developed at the same time as the xbox version is a total joke.

https://www.ign.com/articles/2003/02/07/capcom-vs-snk-2-review

Educate yourself..lol

https://www.metacritic.com/game/playstation-2/capcom-vs-snk-2-mark-of-the-millennium-2001

3-Yeah that second bold part is pull from deep deep down your buns,please link me to to the articles that prove that most xbox owners didn't have a memory card,on those days memory cards were the standard and gamers were used to carry their own into friends house,is no secret is the reason why the xbox had a memory card in the first place,and i sure didn't know a single xbox owner of my friends who didn't own a memory card.

Hell some even had converters to use their DS2 on the xbox,because many considered the huge original controller to be a horrible huge thing.

4-Is was total bullshit to force people into buying a remote,in fact i had 2 xbox one normal and 1 modded and the moded one didn't need the remote at all.

The xbox was a dvd player so it had anything to do with it you were forced to pay to play movies.

5-No people didn't have memory cards on PS2 and you should stop inventing crap to try to win an argument memory cards on the PS2 days was the INDUSTRY standard not the rule that broke the guidelines,the GC and DC had memory cards.

What you believe is not what the industry believe you have a totally shitty and skewed view of it by the way.

Avatar image for Steppy_76
#200 Edited by Steppy_76 (2378 posts) -

@tormentos: I'm not wasting anymore time tonight so here's one link to show the xbox had been widely rumored prior to gdc 2000... the first paragraph. Ms dropped an EXPECTED bombshell. It took literally nobody by surprise.

https://www.ign.com/articles/2000/03/14/gdc-2000-does-xbox-