[Traveller]

Silencer, on 12 June 2013 - 09:49 AM, said:

^And in so doing justify and support Microsoft's sudden turn for extremely draconian "treat our customers as criminals" mentality. Thanks, Traveller.

I was kind of including their mentality and attitude in with the 'see how it goes.' I can't see them doing a u-turn at this stage though, and there is really nothing about the x-1 that interests me at this stage.

This post has been edited by Traveller: 12 June 2013 - 03:47 PM

[Illuyankas]

Oh, the PS4 is region free? And $399 and $15 shipping to get one in Aus/NZ? Some good news at last for the Antipodes.

[Mentalist]

Illuyankas, on 12 June 2013 - 02:42 PM, said:

You've seen my posts, brevity is a sometimes concept, haha.

Also more shooting themselves in the foot from MS:

Oh, wow. M$oft, just how bloody arrogant are you?
Look, we all know, you dream of a magical word, where everyone owns your consoles, and pays you an hourly fee to be able to use them, and if they dare to go offline, you can charge them a million dollars for going offline.

But you never actually SAY these things out loud!

just... wow.

btw, last E3, EA's CEO spent the entire presentation prattling about how "everyhting EA's gonna do from now on will be online". In the next year, EA sales tanked, their biggest releases (Dead Space 3 and Sim City) were PR disasters and didn't sell all that great, and said CEO got tanked. This year, EA toned down the "everything is always online!" rhetoric considerably. They still WANT everyhting yo be online, but they presented DA3, which is a single-player RPG, and they said you can play NFS offline (though it's obviously not as "fun" as online).

I hope so very much Sony pounces on this.

[Silencer]

Illuyankas, on 12 June 2013 - 12:34 PM, said:

Man, post after post of Obdigore calling people hipsters for disliking the X-box One and you snap at Traveller for 'I might get one maybe?'

Did you miss the part where Obdi and I had a back-and-forth about that? O.o

The issue I had with Traveller's post is that it more or less sounded like he was considering getting one later regardless of their current policies, which is tantamount to throwing money at them and screaming "TAKE MY SOUL!!!" while prostrating oneself for them to slaughter - because a sale in five years is exactly the same as a day one sale, in the long run, as it justifies their practices financially in the end. Apparently that's not what Traveller meant, so all good.



And yeah. Their stance that anyone who doesn't have internet can just buy a 360, aside from being callous and somewhat offensive in and of itself, completely misses the rest of the problem, to do with how the internet connection is primarily required to make sure their customers are not criminals. I seriously want to see an interviewer put that to them, because I'm sure their response would be priceless, if depressing. Besides, don't you know, the 360 is totally a 1:1 substitute for the Xbox One. >.>

[Illuyankas]

Meanwhile the turd in the ice cream sundae that is PS4's requirement of PSN+ to play online multiplayer became considerably less bad once I learned that 1) single player is unaffected, 2) it's $50/year, 3) you don't need it if you want to watch Netflix or any other kind of online service, unlike Xbox, 4) you get a free PS4 game every month you have it, and 5) someone got access to $250 worth of games to download just from signing up today, with more every month.

Also I've heard something about a UK release in November, so they've got all of half a year to reveal all the flaws they've hidden to stop me considering getting a PS4 for Christmas or thereabouts (seriously a new PC is completely out of my reach atm) which stuff like choosing the single or multi player half of a game to install first isn't helping with!

WHERE'S MY MONEY SONY




In non accidental-shill news, I'm thinking EA's amount of Xbone (was avoiding using this TO AVOID BIAS til I saw it on a banner) exclusives is because Microsoft's DRM strategy matches, or possibly was inspired by, their own. Wonder how long til they start making moves to fix that? Also, my brother reminded me the Wii-U in fact exists. I know, right?

[Silencer]

Illuyankas, on 13 June 2013 - 01:54 AM, said:

Meanwhile the turd in the ice cream sundae that is PS4's requirement of PSN+ to play online multiplayer became considerably less bad once I learned that 1) single player is unaffected, 2) it's $50/year, 3) you don't need it if you want to watch Netflix or any other kind of online service, unlike Xbox, 4) you get a free PS4 game every month you have it, and 5) someone got access to $250 worth of games to download just from signing up today, with more every month.

Also I've heard something about a UK release in November, so they've got all of half a year to reveal all the flaws they've hidden to stop me considering getting a PS4 for Christmas or thereabouts (seriously a new PC is completely out of my reach atm) which stuff like choosing the single or multi player half of a game to install first isn't helping with!

WHERE'S MY MONEY SONY




In non accidental-shill news, I'm thinking EA's amount of Xbone (was avoiding using this TO AVOID BIAS til I saw it on a banner) exclusives is because Microsoft's DRM strategy matches, or possibly was inspired by, their own. Wonder how long til they start making moves to fix that? Also, my brother reminded me the Wii-U in fact exists. I know, right?

Oh, yeah, I was meaning to address the fact that PS+ is basically cheaper/as cheap as Live Gold, gives you free games, doesn't affect anything other than online multiplayer, and was probably (courtesy of Luci's wisdom) going to be used to make the PS4's multiplayer experience a lot more consistent and competitive with Xbox's. It's literally a landslide in PS4's favour, there's nothing in it that they've done wrong so far, and it would take a LOT of things that are new and terrible (because most of the old points are covered already) to even get near the level of Xbox 1's atrociousness. XD

It was pretty much obvious that EA's reason for dropping the online passes a few months ago was because they would no longer need them, given Xbox's new built-in DRM of sorts, I thought. How they're going to handle PC and PS4 games from now on will be interesting though...

[Mentalist]

Illuyankas, on 13 June 2013 - 01:54 AM, said:

Meanwhile the turd in the ice cream sundae that is PS4's requirement of PSN+ to play online multiplayer became considerably less bad once I learned that 1) single player is unaffected, 2) it's $50/year, 3) you don't need it if you want to watch Netflix or any other kind of online service, unlike Xbox, 4) you get a free PS4 game every month you have it, and 5) someone got access to $250 worth of games to download just from signing up today, with more every month.

Also I've heard something about a UK release in November, so they've got all of half a year to reveal all the flaws they've hidden to stop me considering getting a PS4 for Christmas or thereabouts (seriously a new PC is completely out of my reach atm) which stuff like choosing the single or multi player half of a game to install first isn't helping with!

WHERE'S MY MONEY SONY




In non accidental-shill news, I'm thinking EA's amount of Xbone (was avoiding using this TO AVOID BIAS til I saw it on a banner) exclusives is because Microsoft's DRM strategy matches, or possibly was inspired by, their own. Wonder how long til they start making moves to fix that? Also, my brother reminded me the Wii-U in fact exists. I know, right?

I've mentioned this before, but EA is currently the post AssCreed 2 disaster-Ubisoft--they got burned bad by their "always online" crap this year. Last E3, Riccietello plain out said "every single EA game will have an online component that's a crucial part of the game". Then Dead Space 3 tanked financially (with a shitstorm over microtransactions), SimCity happened (with a shitstorm about always online), EA posted huge losses, Riccietello got canned. This E3 we've had DA3 (which presumably is still a single-player RPG, Battlefield 4 campaign and multi demo were two sepatrate things, and I heard the Need for Speed dev say "you can play single player offline (or you can go online and play with people, which is much more fun)".
I'm sure they'll stick with stuff like Origin, and Battlelog for BF4 probably isn't going away either, but they are at least considering the offline single-player crowd, even if grudgingly.

I mean, to be fair, I have bought DA:O off Origin (back when it was EA Downloader). I can play that game offline, without launching Origin (unlike games I bought thru Steam*). And I don't need to go online to log in to Bioware's servers every time I want to play the game (*cough* fuck you, Blizzard *cough*). EA have an option to provide for single-player crowd, even with Origin. And if the backlash against the XBone is strong enough, I'm sure they'll consider this, no matter how grudgingly.

*Admittedly, Valve DID recently get their act together in making Steam's offline mode an actual thing that works*

[Obdigore]

Lucifer, on 12 June 2013 - 02:11 PM, said:

Here you go Obdi.
I was a bit off with my guess, but apparently they're still not QTEs
I could see how what he's saying could work. It actually reminds me a little of the Gears quick reload thing for some reason.

Illy, I'd hardly call that snapping. This is Silencer, if he was telling someone off there'd be a page long post to do so

Yes I saw some interviews about that yesterday, it is rhythm based button mashing with 'killing blows' that light up on the screen if you want to do them. Still disappointed it wasn't the 'Kinect 2.0 only' thing that it was being billed as before E3.

edit -> Also, ME3 style tactical shooter in X-Com universe? Yea I'm getting this http://www.ign.com/v...gn-live-e3-2013

This post has been edited by Obdigore: 13 June 2013 - 03:28 AM

[Lucifer's Heaven]

Obdigore, on 13 June 2013 - 03:07 AM, said:

Yes I saw some interviews about that yesterday, it is rhythm based button mashing with 'killing blows' that light up on the screen if you want to do them. Still disappointed it wasn't the 'Kinect 2.0 only' thing that it was being billed as before E3.

edit -> Also, ME3 style tactical shooter in X-Com universe? Yea I'm getting this http://www.ign.com/v...gn-live-e3-2013

Yeah, I know what you mean. Still, it's a vast improvement over the QTE shit it first looked like.

Silencer, on 13 June 2013 - 02:15 AM, said:

Oh, yeah, I was meaning to address the fact that PS+ is basically cheaper/as cheap as Live Gold, gives you free games, doesn't affect anything other than online multiplayer, and was probably (courtesy of Luci's wisdom) going to be used to make the PS4's multiplayer experience a lot more consistent and competitive with Xbox's.

What I was talking to Silencer about was the issues the PS3 had with online play. PS3 online play and online offerings for games started out very poor. It has slowly become more even with those of the 360, but it was a long road up. One of the major problems was their methods. Microsoft does make a lot of money off XBLGold memberships, but a portion of that actually goes to paying for the bandwidth fees and stuff for the multiplayer games and online offerings. So it is quite a bit cheaper for game companies to supply these things to 360 customers. On the PS3, it was free to play for consumers, so Sony passed all of these fees onto the developer/publishers. Early on for both the systems this led to very lackluster online gaming on the PS3.
I could be wrong in what they plan to do with the PS+ funds now that it'll be required for online multiplayer, but I am guessing Sony is aiming to patch this gap up come the PS4, because that difference hurt them last time around.

[Obdigore]

Lucifer, on 13 June 2013 - 04:00 AM, said:

Silencer, on 13 June 2013 - 02:15 AM, said:

Oh, yeah, I was meaning to address the fact that PS+ is basically cheaper/as cheap as Live Gold, gives you free games, doesn't affect anything other than online multiplayer, and was probably (courtesy of Luci's wisdom) going to be used to make the PS4's multiplayer experience a lot more consistent and competitive with Xbox's.

What I was talking to Silencer about was the issues the PS3 had with online play. PS3 online play and online offerings for games started out very poor. It has slowly become more even with those of the 360, but it was a long road up. One of the major problems was their methods. Microsoft does make a lot of money off XBLGold memberships, but a portion of that actually goes to paying for the bandwidth fees and stuff for the multiplayer games and online offerings. So it is quite a bit cheaper for game companies to supply these things to 360 customers. On the PS3, it was free to play for consumers, so Sony passed all of these fees onto the developer/publishers. Early on for both the systems this led to very lackluster online gaming on the PS3.
I could be wrong in what they plan to do with the PS+ funds now that it'll be required for online multiplayer, but I am guessing Sony is aiming to patch this gap up come the PS4, because that difference hurt them last time around.

I hope so. I remember playing online with Killzone 2, BF3, BF:BC2 and RDR, and the online on the PS3 was fucking terribly laggy. The only one I purchased on my 360 was BF3, and it felt a ton better just changing networks. If that has changed then good for them, because it really needed to.

I'd also note that they announced dedicated servers for the next halo game, which I'm happy about. If MS moves all their shit to dedicated servers they will remain the go-to for FPSes for sure. Especially since they have an exclusive (at least for now) on Titanfall and they have Halo and Gears. That said, the next Killzone does look really good, but Killzone 2 was mehtastic at best compared to BF and COD.

[BlackMoranthofDoom]

What I really liked about e3 this year is that there were so many open world games that were shown.
Watch Dogs, MGS5, Witcher 3. The Division, The Crew, Saints Row 4, Infamous...

Where is Just Cause 3 though? That was the game I was most anticipating at e3, since Avalanche posted a teaser pic a few months back. Hopefully we'll get something soon.

[Mentalist]

BlackMoranthofDoom, on 15 June 2013 - 05:25 AM, said:

What I really liked about e3 this year is that there were so many open world games that were shown.
Watch Dogs, MGS5, Witcher 3. The Division, The Crew, Saints Row 4, Infamous...

Where is Just Cause 3 though? That was the game I was most anticipating at e3, since Avalanche posted a teaser pic a few months back. Hopefully we'll get something soon.

Avalanche is making a Mad Max game. It was announced in the Sony Conference.

I like Open World games. I don't like having to play them online.

[Khellendros]

Mentalist, on 15 June 2013 - 07:55 AM, said:

I like Open World games. I don't like having to play them online.

This.


That's the direction we're headed toward though, apparently. I wonder if developers feel that if there is a social aspect, then people will play their games for longer (and presumably, pay for additional stuff too)?

This post has been edited by Khellendros: 15 June 2013 - 09:30 AM

[Silencer]

Khellendros, on 15 June 2013 - 09:27 AM, said:

Mentalist, on 15 June 2013 - 07:55 AM, said:

I like Open World games. I don't like having to play them online.

This.


That's the direction we're headed toward though, apparently. I wonder if developers feel that if there is a social aspect, then people will play their games for longer (and presumably, pay for additional stuff too)?

I'll third this. There are times and places for MMOs, it should not be in *every* game. What would be neat in most every open-world game would the option to play them in 1) local co-op and 2) online co-op. Sure, it can fuck the balance, but that is something I think is fine for an optional mode that allows you to have a bit of chaotic fun with friends. It shouldn't be mandatory, but it would be a neat feature to have in, say, Skyrim.

But yeah, shouldn't have to play online to experience open world games. Not everything HAS to be multiplayer, dammit!

[Stalker]

I liked many of the games on display- Titanfall, The Witcher 3, The Division, Destiny, etc. There seems to be a lot to look forward to in the next year, minus the whole Xbox One problem for the MS fans.

If you are looking for some good coverage, check here. I think the Rev3 team did a good job with their interviews/previews of the big games of the show.

[Illuyankas]

You do need to be careful, as a few games were obscured as to their exclusivity. For example, Titanfall is not an Xbone exclusive, but will be coming on 360 and PC as well (it's a source game, it'll run on anything).

[Mentalist]

Briar King, on 18 June 2013 - 02:24 AM, said:

So for those able to see it this yr(not me fuck you Esquire for dismantling G4 team) how was it on the whole? Better then the past few yrs cause all the next gen info or the same over the past 5 yrs or so?

I only really remember the last E3. It was the one I watched fully, and in 2011, I followed a lot of game coverage.

Games-wise, I wasn't too wowed this year. I thought there were several interesting titles (most of which I already knew something about), but I didn't really find a "wow" game, that made me think "well, this is just awesome, can't wait to play that".

In 2011, there was Prey 2.
Last year, there were Watch Dogs.
This year, I really can't say. I mean The Witcher 3 sounds great, but i'm a diehard CDPRed fan, so this was no surprise. The Division seems like the game that should've wowed me, but it's an MMO, so it didn't. The online FPSs aren't my cup of tea, so nothing really there. I did like the Arkham Origins footage, so it's definitely a "to buy" game now, but it's still nothing incredible.

The overal console meta-war was interesting to follow, but it's "watching a trainwreck happening"-type fascination. Doubly so, since I worked in marketing.

But yeah, games-wise, I wasn't too ipressed. 2011 remains the best E3 of the last few years, imho.

[Obdigore]

I disagree. There were quite a few games shown that were quite exciting.

Titanfall
BF4
Rome Total War II
The Division
Forza 5
Driveclub
MGS5
Final Fantasy XV
Kingdom Hearts 3
Destiny
New Battlefront Game
A Mirrors Edge Game?

I mean really.

[Silencer]

Obdigore, on 18 June 2013 - 08:41 AM, said:

I disagree. There were quite a few games shown that were quite exciting.



I mean really.

Lol. To put that in context we have:

Titanfall - Shooter, but with robots and ass-jetpacks!
BF4 - Yet Another Yearly Shooter
Rome Total War II - This was not E3-reveal, and looks great, but really...nothing new?
The Division - I think Mentalist covered why this one might not appeal (MMO)
Forza 5 - Yet Another Driving Game
Driveclub - Yet Another Driving Game
MGS5 - Again, was this revealed at E3? Was there that much to it?
Final Fantasy XV - Massive Reveal? Hell yes. Did it "WOW" anyone? Not really. Because it was all pre-rendered trailer, the announcement was great but told us nothing.
Kingdom Hearts 3 - Massive Reveal, with potentially-in-game-footage. OK, so this one was huge. But if you're not a console gamer or aren't into KH in general, it won't matter to you.
Destiny - Again, not really revealed here. The gameplay shown was pretty generic, and if anything, it underwhelmed at E3.
New Battlefront Game - Massive Reveal, but it was barely even announced. So while the excitement might be high (tempered by the fact that it's a reboot, probably into a YAYS) it wasn't much to go on.
A Mirrors Edge Game? - Again, awesome. But what did we see? Again, it's a reboot.


Now, tell me again why this E3 was great? XD

It was all about the console war, and there was no exclusive game announced which was a "must buy that console for", was there? I'm not denying that those games were *exciting*, but I think Ment's point was there was nothing earth-shatteringly awesome for him.

I'm the same. KH3 and FFXV were the two largest announcements for me, and I'm not particularly salivating over them, even. Yet, anyway. XD

That being said, maybe I'm just getting cynical and hard-to-impress in my old age.

[Obdigore]

Silencer, on 18 June 2013 - 10:21 AM, said:

Obdigore, on 18 June 2013 - 08:41 AM, said:

I disagree. There were quite a few games shown that were quite exciting.



I mean really.

Lol. To put that in context we have:

Titanfall - Shooter, but with robots and ass-jetpacks!
BF4 - Yet Another Yearly Shooter
Rome Total War II - This was not E3-reveal, and looks great, but really...nothing new?
The Division - I think Mentalist covered why this one might not appeal (MMO)
Forza 5 - Yet Another Driving Game
Driveclub - Yet Another Driving Game
MGS5 - Again, was this revealed at E3? Was there that much to it?
Final Fantasy XV - Massive Reveal? Hell yes. Did it "WOW" anyone? Not really. Because it was all pre-rendered trailer, the announcement was great but told us nothing.
Kingdom Hearts 3 - Massive Reveal, with potentially-in-game-footage. OK, so this one was huge. But if you're not a console gamer or aren't into KH in general, it won't matter to you.
Destiny - Again, not really revealed here. The gameplay shown was pretty generic, and if anything, it underwhelmed at E3.
New Battlefront Game - Massive Reveal, but it was barely even announced. So while the excitement might be high (tempered by the fact that it's a reboot, probably into a YAYS) it wasn't much to go on.
A Mirrors Edge Game? - Again, awesome. But what did we see? Again, it's a reboot.


Now, tell me again why this E3 was great? XD

It was all about the console war, and there was no exclusive game announced which was a "must buy that console for", was there? I'm not denying that those games were *exciting*, but I think Ment's point was there was nothing earth-shatteringly awesome for him.

I'm the same. KH3 and FFXV were the two largest announcements for me, and I'm not particularly salivating over them, even. Yet, anyway. XD

That being said, maybe I'm just getting cynical and hard-to-impress in my old age.

So what you are saying is 'anything that isn't utterly new, I hate it'.

Go Go Mecha-Hipstencer? Seriously, there really isn't a game you can reveal using current tech that hasn't been 'done before'. There isn't a game you can name released in the last 5 years that I can't just shoot down like you just did.

KH3 and FFXV were the two worst announcements on that list, I just put them on there because for some unknown reason people still play shitty hybrid j/w rpgs.