[Mentalist]

Khellendros, on 11 June 2013 - 06:31 PM, said:

I am staggered that Sony went with no restrictions on used games/no requisite online connectivity for single-player. Staggered. I was convinced they would unroll similar policies to Microsoft, but dress it up with something to make it seem a little less restrictive.

If I do buy a console this next generation, it will be the PlayStation 4 (despite that damn controller, sigh).

I didn't get the same feeling from Titanfall that a lot of others seem to. I do like the concept, but I can see a strong possibility of it getting old fast. Plus, I simply prefer single-player games anyway.

A LOT of these new games seem to be going for single-player/multi-player hybrid gaming. Playing a game in a persistent online world where your friends drop in to help you out really seemed to be a theme, from Watch Dogs, to Destiny, to The Division, to The Crew, etc. I'm not sure how I feel about that. I prefer my single-player gaming to remain a personal experience.


The Division looks like it was supposed to be Ubisoft's Watch Dogs for this year's E3, but didn't garner quite the same OMFG reaction. Still looks pretty intriguing to me though.

The Order (the titles have been really lame thus far BTW) I really liked the look of despite it being just a cinematic. It's like an insane combination of three or four vastly different time periods.

Battlefront 3. "Please love us!" says EA And I do love you, EA, I do. Why? Because, for me, Mirror's Edge 2 was news that made me grin the most.

PS4 will require PS+ ($45/year, i believe) for multiplayer. Which makes me wonder how all these "persistent world" games like almost everyhting big Ubi is doing will work on the PS4.

I also agree about Division. It seems Ubi was trying to hit the same "edgy, controversial, and relevant to NOW social commentary" vibe it got with Watch Dogs on E3 2012 (where Watch Dogs literally stole the show for me). The problem is, I'll break down what Division is for you:

1) Third-Person shooter
2) MMO-RPG
3) Set in a post-apocalyptic world.

read the three points, separately, about 15 seconds apart, and tell me you didn't yawn at at least one of the 3 basic things we were told about the game.

Don't get me wrong, I think the idea is super-cool--the post-breakout breakdown of modern society, 5 days post-collapse. But the execution... it seems that it's trying to hit ALL THE TROPES. Whereas Watch Dogs came out almost marrying Deus Ex concepts with a gameworld that's a mix of AssCreed and GTA, Division looks like it's trying do Fallout, in modern times, and also be an MMORPG (which makes people thing WoW. You know it does).

Now, if this was re-branded as a more survival-based FarCry, with optional coop, I think Ubi would've gotten a much better reaction.

Overall, i find myself agreeing with Obdi--for all its faults, EA had the strongest showing, because they brought back Mirror's Edge, they teased Battlefront, they've put back a bunch of Battlefield features fans have clamored for, and they looked to be taking their sweet time with DA3. Basically, EA now has an image of "we listened to what the consumers wanted", and they made no obvious messups. Unveiling Titanfall helped too.

Ubi had a strong showing, but they lacked the wow factor. The Crew was good, but it's one of the 5 racing games announced, and can't be a flagship title, because racing games are still fairly niche in the grand scheme of things. Division was to be the big news, and its pitch fell on tired ears.

In terms of hardware devs, Sony comprehensively won the PR battle with lower price point, and the used games issue. M$oft will no doubt retain its core audience that buys 1-4 games a year (no condescension, btw. There are people who only have a console to play FIFA. Several of my friends are like that, and I got nothing against that). These people will buy the Xbone out of brand loaylty and if they don't have issues with always online, they'll keep buying their multi-player FPS of choice or their EA or other sport games, and they'll be perfectly happy. Some of the so called "core gamers", who are more industry aware may however switch to Sony, because of how they handled the PR war. That's my opinion at least. Whetehr m$oft will make any actual market gains using its "TV-focused" branding remains to be seen.

[Khellendros]

What are everybody's thoughts on Sony saying that it will be up to the individual publishers if they want to impose DRM on their third-party games. On the face of it, this sounds exactly like what Microsoft said. But I think there are differences.

For one, Sony have not built in DRM into their new system. What they were talking about (from the sounds of it, anyway) is that publishers will still potentially do all the things that they sometimes do this generation, like impose one-time use codes for multiplayer. There's nothing that Sony could do about that anyway. Then there is also the fact that you won't be checked a minimum of every 24 hours to make sure you're not a filthy pirate or whatever. And then that without these built-in restrictions, you will still be able to sell/gift your game how you want when you want, not with "participating retailers" only.


As for needing PS+ to play multiplayer...if that includes local split-screen multiplayer, then that's annoying. For online multiplayer, however, I can understand it. I've been paying for years for Xbox Live Gold membership anyway, so there would be no difference there for me personally.

[Mentalist]

I don't see it as being the same, either. M$oft said it's up to publishers to allow resale of their games. No matter what the publisher says, m$oft will STILL make the XBone phone home to make sure you're not being a filthy pirate.

Sony is keeping the status quo. as long as the design of the PS4 doesn't allow for anything more egregious than what publishers have used before, no one will make any waves. And the whole "make no waves and collect all those disillusioned in M$oft's treatment of their customers" seems to be Sony's main pitch so far.

Not sure about multi, but I'd guess they mean online. playing split-screen is one thing all consoles have always done. If Sony suddenly makes people pay for that, it'll get lumped in with M$oft on "taking away gamer's freedom"

[Overactive Imagination]

Titanfall just looked like another FPS to me. I'm sick of FPS games.

The only games I'm really excited for are the next MGS and Dark Souls games, which are both coming to PS3 as far as I know.

[QuickTidal]

Welp. I'm switching back to Sony and getting a PS4. That presentation nailed it.

I think IGN said it best, Sony came out and dealt Microsoft a bunch of body blows and then delivered the knockout punch.

Methinks you are going to see a lot of Xboxer's jumping ship.

[Mentalist]

So, the biggest single takeaway from E3 for someone not affected by the console wars:

2014 will be a very good year for RPGs. Project Eternity, The Witcher 3, Dark Souls 2, and even DA3. A ton of heavy hitters, and all will be clamoring for consumers' money, so each will try to outdo the rest, which can only mean good things for the consumers.

[Silencer]

Illuyankas, on 11 June 2013 - 03:32 PM, said:

$749 NZD (590.89 USD) for the Xbone

$649.00 NZD (510.50 US Dollar) for the PS4


What hellhole nation do you live in, Silencer?

Welcome to my world, Illy. All electronics to some extent or less sell for much more than the exchange rate would suggest. Australia is the same. Games have it the worst - a $60USD game today would be $76 NZ. You know how much games retail for over here? $120NZ. Yeah, you read that right. $50 over the exchange rate price. Now, granted, they have to ship the things here. Big deal, how many disks are manufactured in the US? China is closer to us, and probably stops here on the way here sometimes. And in terms of cost-per-disk to ship them...nowhere near it. So what you have is realistically a markup of easily $40 - i.e. half again the cost of the disk in the US.

It sucks. It really does. Which is why I kinda laugh and cry a little whenever I see Americans bemoaning their $60 console games. They should try living in NZ or Australia.

[Slow Ben]

QuickTidal said:

1370982059[/url]' post='1062184']
Welp. I'm switching back to Sony and getting a PS4. That presentation nailed it.

I think IGN said it best, Sony came out and dealt Microsoft a bunch of body blows and then delivered the knockout punch.

Methinks you are going to see a lot of Xboxer's jumping ship.

Yeah, the constant connection nailed it for me. Or I'll just buy a gaming computer, finally.

[Aptorian]

QuickTidal, on 11 June 2013 - 08:20 PM, said:

Welp. I'm switching back to Sony and getting a PS4. That presentation nailed it.

I think IGN said it best, Sony came out and dealt Microsoft a bunch of body blows and then delivered the knockout punch.

Methinks you are going to see a lot of Xboxer's jumping ship.

I've never really understood this need to drop one console for another. Maybe if you're a poor student or you spouse hates your gaming habits but why not just buy both consoles? Why choose? This isn't like purchasing an iPhone or a Samsung. You can buy both and enjoy exclusives on both platforms.

Admittedly I am going to buy the PS4 first and maybe wait a year or more before buying the X-bone but I certainly don't feel I need to pick a side.

[QuickTidal]

Aptorius, on 12 June 2013 - 02:54 AM, said:

QuickTidal, on 11 June 2013 - 08:20 PM, said:

Welp. I'm switching back to Sony and getting a PS4. That presentation nailed it.

I think IGN said it best, Sony came out and dealt Microsoft a bunch of body blows and then delivered the knockout punch.

Methinks you are going to see a lot of Xboxer's jumping ship.

I've never really understood this need to drop one console for another. Maybe if you're a poor student or you spouse hates your gaming habits but why not just buy both consoles? Why choose? This isn't like purchasing an iPhone or a Samsung. You can buy both and enjoy exclusives on both platforms.

Admittedly I am going to buy the PS4 first and maybe wait a year or more before buying the X-bone but I certainly don't feel I need to pick a side.

Multiple gaming consoles is hubris. It's over $1000 to get both, plus whatever games...it just makes little sense. How much time can I arguably devote to a game in a week? Then add how many games are exclusive to a particular console (not all that many)...why on earth would I need both?

Unless I'm playing games ALL the time, and HAVE to own all the console-exclusive games and play them...there is zero point to having two consoles.

[Jakovasaurus]

Did Microsoft (through E3 or their conference a few weeks ago) ever emphasize that Xbox One is a blu-ray player? This tech is a last console technology but I thought that it might be a positive they could hang their hat on.

[Obdigore]

Jakovasaurus, on 12 June 2013 - 03:14 AM, said:

Did Microsoft (through E3 or their conference a few weeks ago) ever emphasize that Xbox One is a blu-ray player? This tech is a last console technology but I thought that it might be a positive they could hang their hat on.

They said it was a Blu-ray player, yes. Honestly MS's game showing is better than Sonys, but Sony beat MS on DRM and price, and with internet angst, I think that is going to give Sony any an early lead.

Otoh, anyone think Wii-u isn't a shitty system and that Nintendo is going to do something besides recycling their same franchises over and over?

[Morgoth]

It would be sort of cool to collapse into the couch and say "Xbox, play Game of Thrones season 3 episode 5" and have everything turn on and start. A little sci fi in ones daily life.

Alas, hardly enough to buy the system, at least for me.

[Obdigore]

Apparently Amazon US has sold all their xboxone pre-order stock.

[Traveller]

I can't believe the rut Nintendo seem to be in. The latest ad for a game I saw was 'Luigis Mansion 2' - which looks exactly the same as the 1st one, which is probably about 10 years old.

I dont think owning more than one console is hubris - at one time I had a gamecube, ps2 and xbox, and I use all three.

Its different now most games are released on all formats, but I presently own a pc, ps3 and 360. Its not like i bought them all at once, I just used them for different things.

I think I'll get a ps4 next, and see how x-one does and if it will offer anything I actually want.

This post has been edited by Traveller: 12 June 2013 - 08:19 AM

[Silencer]

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

[Illuyankas]

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?'

[Lucifer's Heaven]

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

[Cause]

I am a little upset by the increasing trend to hybrid single and multiplayer games. I have just never got into multiplyaer, its hard for me to say why. That said Destiny, the division and titanfall all look fantastic so I may have to rethink this. Destiny though more than the others because Titanfall and the division look they will lack a real story from what I have seen so far. No matter how pretty the visuals and gameplay of titanfall look if their it will need a story and will have to give me a sense of achievement to keep me playing. Here achievement does mea unlocking a better gun or bigger mech it means knowing I saved the world.

[Illuyankas]

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

Also more shooting themselves in the foot from MS: