No good reason to buy a PS4 or Xbox One

Reserved for modern gaming discussions.
Gilly1
Posts: 133
Joined: December 31st, 1969, 7:00 pm

No good reason to buy a PS4 or Xbox One

Postby Gilly1 » August 12th, 2014, 7:24 am

I plan on picking up a PS4 soon as the last generation has reached it's limits and I'm looking forward to finally upgrading from the longest generation ever.
I don't feel compelled to buy a WiiU simply because it feels outdated right now. I would have felt differently a couple of years ago.

Atarifever1
Posts: 3892
Joined: December 31st, 1969, 7:00 pm

No good reason to buy a PS4 or Xbox One

Postby Atarifever1 » August 12th, 2014, 8:06 am

[QUOTE=Gilly]I plan on picking up a PS4 soon as the last generation has reached it's limits and I'm looking forward to finally upgrading from the longest generation ever.
[/QUOTE]
I know you're exaggerating, but I have to point out it is in no way the longest generation ever software-wise, and barely hardware -wise.  The 2600 launched in 1977 and got its last official NA release in 1990.  The Inty was its contemporary, and that got offical releases from 1980 to 1990.  So if you bought into that generation in 1977, you had 13 years of support, and even entering in 1980 got you a decade. 

Then there's the PS2.  It launched in 2000 and got an official FIFA release in September 2013, giving it a 13 year run as well. 

Right now this past generation has only run from 2005 to 2014, a mere 9 years.  The NES did that much.

It was a slightly long generation between new hardware releases.  The Xbox 360 came out in 2005 and we had the Wii U by 2012.  I have said the longer time between hardware releases might explain why people thought the Wii U was such a complete disaster (many gamers online never having seen a new piece of hardware release), but it was still only 7 years.  If we're only looking at major platforms, the distance between the TG-16 and the Saturn is nearly that long. 


ptdebate1
Posts: 909
Joined: December 31st, 1969, 7:00 pm

No good reason to buy a PS4 or Xbox One

Postby ptdebate1 » August 12th, 2014, 9:50 am

[QUOTE=Weekend_Warrior]I'm still waiting to hear what gaming experiences you can get on the Wii U that you couldn't get on the Wii [/QUOTE]

Mario Kart with solid online play, Pikmin 3 with stylus controls, off-screen play as a built-in feature of every game out of box with no additional hardware required, GBA and DS virtual console, best Monster Hunter release to date (solid online with voice chat is a huge part of this), 3D Mario with multiplayer, friends list, Miiverse for sharing drawings, etc...

scotland171
Posts: 816
Joined: December 31st, 1969, 7:00 pm

No good reason to buy a PS4 or Xbox One

Postby scotland171 » August 12th, 2014, 10:43 am

[QUOTE=Atarifever] I know you're exaggerating, but I have to point out it is in no way the longest generation ever software-wise, and barely hardware -wise.  The 2600 launched in 1977 and got its last official NA release in 1990.  The Inty was its contemporary, and that got offical releases from 1980 to 1990.  So if you bought into that generation in 1977, you had 13 years of support, and even entering in 1980 got you a decade.  Then there's the PS2.  It launched in 2000 and got an official FIFA release in September 2013, giving it a 13 year run as well.  Right now this past generation has only run from 2005 to 2014, a mere 9 years.  The NES did that much.

[/QUOTE]

You're a stats guy, so I'm going to quibble with you, my friend.  Just because the Atari 2600 got an official release in 1990 does not make it a 13 year generation.  The hardware was obsolete when Atari retailed the 5200 (yes, I know its considered the same generation on Wikipedia, but it was advertised as the successor by Atari itself).  If I get the license holders from some long dead hardware, say the Commodore 64, to 'officially' license my homebrew game, does that mean its still a viable platform?  Nope.   Just because the Sega Master System lived on in Brazil for political reasons should not really count. Just because companies were making Pong machines well into the 80s did not mean that the first generation was not already gone.  

From a stats viewpoint, look at the *distribution* of software releases. Just because the software distribution is skewed to the right (meaning the occasional release years later) really is just an outlier, or just a tail observation.  The console generation is where first 95% of that distribution's retail sales or software release are.  The left tail gets included because we begin a generation at launch, even if a console does little at launch.  Not the back end though.  Just because a game or a release happens years later...that's not the end bracket of the generation.  Its like going to the beach on vacation.   The vacation is over when you shower off, and get the sand out of your shoes and get back in the car.  Just because you find some sand in your shorts later on, doesn't mean you are still at the beach.

edit: spelling corrections

ptdebate1
Posts: 909
Joined: December 31st, 1969, 7:00 pm

No good reason to buy a PS4 or Xbox One

Postby ptdebate1 » August 12th, 2014, 1:01 pm

I agree with Scotty. The fact that new games (DestinyCall of Duty:AW) are still getting released on both PS3 and XBOX 360 is a testament to the longevity of this generation. It's still in full momentum nearly ten years after its launch, with several new exclusive games on the horizon (Persona 5Kingdom Hearts II.5). This generation is unprecedented in its staying power, a testament to the fact that the gaps in hardware capability from a graphics perspective are narrowing.

Gentlegamer1
Posts: 687
Joined: December 31st, 1969, 7:00 pm

No good reason to buy a PS4 or Xbox One

Postby Gentlegamer1 » August 12th, 2014, 3:49 pm

[QUOTE=Atarifever]
I know you're exaggerating, but I have to point out it is in no way the longest generation ever software-wise, and barely hardware -wise.  The 2600 launched in 1977 and got its last official NA release in 1990.  The Inty was its contemporary, and that got offical releases from 1980 to 1990.  So if you bought into that generation in 1977, you had 13 years of support, and even entering in 1980 got you a decade. 

Then there's the PS2.  It launched in 2000 and got an official FIFA release in September 2013, giving it a 13 year run as well. 

Right now this past generation has only run from 2005 to 2014, a mere 9 years.  The NES did that much.

It was a slightly long generation between new hardware releases.  The Xbox 360 came out in 2005 and we had the Wii U by 2012.  I have said the longer time between hardware releases might explain why people thought the Wii U was such a complete disaster (many gamers online never having seen a new piece of hardware release), but it was still only 7 years.  If we're only looking at major platforms, the distance between the TG-16 and the Saturn is nearly that long. 

[/QUOTE]You're looking at release dates and not the actual generational markets. The 2600 crashed with the rest of the industry in 1983, and while it may have had commercial releases during the late 80s, it was not "current gen" at that time, and was incredibly niche, and aimed at the "value market."

Same goes for the NES and PS2 examples - NES had games charting in the NPDs in 1994, but they were the classics series that retailed for $10 aimed at the value market.

At no time during console video game history, has a current gen gone for 8+ years between launch and the introduction of successor systems, as well as those platforms' software dominating the market during that time (Genesis/TG-16 launched in 89, but the NES was still by far the market leader until 92 when Genesis/SNES took over, for example).

Gilly1
Posts: 133
Joined: December 31st, 1969, 7:00 pm

No good reason to buy a PS4 or Xbox One

Postby Gilly1 » August 12th, 2014, 8:21 pm

[QUOTE=scotland17][QUOTE=Atarifever] I know you're exaggerating, but I have to point out it is in no way the longest generation ever software-wise, and barely hardware -wise.  The 2600 launched in 1977 and got its last official NA release in 1990.  The Inty was its contemporary, and that got offical releases from 1980 to 1990.  So if you bought into that generation in 1977, you had 13 years of support, and even entering in 1980 got you a decade.  Then there's the PS2.  It launched in 2000 and got an official FIFA release in September 2013, giving it a 13 year run as well.  Right now this past generation has only run from 2005 to 2014, a mere 9 years.  The NES did that much.

[/QUOTE]

You're a stats guy, so I'm going to quibble with you, my friend.  Just because the Atari 2600 got an official release in 1990 does not make it a 13 year generation.  The hardware was obsolete when Atari retailed the 5200 (yes, I know its considered the same generation on Wikipedia, but it was advertised as the successor by Atari itself).  If I get the license holders from some long dead hardware, say the Commodore 64, to 'officially' license my homebrew game, does that mean its still a viable platform?  Nope.   Just because the Sega Master System lived on in Brazil for political reasons should not really count. Just because companies were making Pong machines well into the 80s did not mean that the first generation was not already gone.  

From a stats viewpoint, look at the *distribution* of software releases. Just because the software distribution is skewed to the right (meaning the occasional release years later) really is just an outlier, or just a tail observation.  The console generation is where first 95% of that distribution's retail sales or software release are.  The left tail gets included because we begin a generation at launch, even if a console does little at launch.  Not the back end though.  Just because a game or a release happens years later...that's not the end bracket of the generation.  Its like going to the beach on vacation.   The vacation is over when you shower off, and get the sand out of your shoes and get back in the car.  Just because you find some sand in your shorts later on, doesn't mean you are still at the beach.

edit: spelling corrections[/QUOTE]

Thanks Scotland for replying before I got a chance to. You get what I mean.
Atari, I think you count generations very differently. This generation is done and stale by the end of this year, and yes it's the longest by how I and many people count them.
As for official game releases technically keeping a console alive, I'm sure there will still be a Madden 2016 or even 2017 released for it. So I suppose it's still got 3 years of life left from that point of view.
But we can agree to disagree here.


Segatarious1
Posts: 1110
Joined: December 31st, 1969, 7:00 pm

No good reason to buy a PS4 or Xbox One

Postby Segatarious1 » August 12th, 2014, 10:02 pm

In a sense, PS3 and Xbox 360 had two lives in one generation.

Xbox 360 had pre Kinect and post Kinect. MS helped to crash motion gaming with its derivative, low quality games that did not work well. But they had the ad money to push it up, and blot up buyers.

Sony started so terrible, and lost so much money, they took along time to get going.

Wii had one life, and then an accelerated death as 360 and Mobile ate into their motion and kid/mom gaming respectively and concurrently. Definitely a unique generation. This current gen should be even more unique, as mobile continues to erode a large chunk of traditional game console buyers, and the game consoles continue to react by raising prices and fees and sequels to their remaining market.

Vexer1
Posts: 883
Joined: December 31st, 1969, 7:00 pm

No good reason to buy a PS4 or Xbox One

Postby Vexer1 » August 13th, 2014, 3:06 am

Nonsense, MS did not "crash" motion gaming in the least, the Kinnect and some of it's games actually sold pretty well(they certainly didn't "blot up" buyers), problem was the game selection just wasn't that great so the lifespan of the device wasn't that long(still did a hell of a lot better then Sony's Move though, which I don't recall ever seeing a single ad for on TV)

Sony's bad start was due to their own blind arrogance in assuming that people would be willing to fork over 600 dollars when the competition was 200-300 dollars cheaper(compared to that, 100 dollars more for an Xbox One isn't that much), and I see they still haven't lost their arrogance(they just couldn't resist shoving their success in people's faces by showing off all those letters at E3 for no apparent reason, seriously what was the point of that?  It just made them look foolish and egotistical).


Oltobaz1
Posts: 1605
Joined: December 31st, 1969, 7:00 pm

No good reason to buy a PS4 or Xbox One

Postby Oltobaz1 » August 13th, 2014, 3:42 am

He pointed out the selection of games wasn't that great. You're actually agreeing with him. PS Move wasn't that great either, and sort of derivative, it seemed more like a business opportunity, let's jump on the motion gaming bandwagon.. 


Return to “Modern Gaming”