When are you going to get an Xbox One or PS4?

I still want a PS2! (T^T)
I'm never gonna get over with the best console in history.
Where all the best modern games have started.
Sadly, they stopped making it this February I think. (Y^Y)

I'm gonna miss you, my lovely console. *sniff* *sniff* (TT^TT)

BTW, regarding the poll, I still don't know, I'm gonna buy one when three games that I like is released. I guess the cheapest as possible? Life is hard now man. (Y^Y)

Never?

I'm pretty sure I'll end up skipping both. If anything, I'll get a PS4 because of Kingdom Hearts 3 and FFX HD. As for Star Wars Battlefront....that's reserved for computer. Battlefront on console pales in comparison to its PC counterparts. Not to mention the community will be around much longer.

I'm not advocating that PCs are better than consoles, it is an implication being made from my argument but not the point I am trying to make; If you had actually followed the argument instead of reading one line and instantly making an assumption like a conceited tool you would know this.

I have a problem with the idea of a console and it's limitations, moreso with the people that produce them rather than the people that play them or what they're gaming capabilities are. It was only when people decided I was still talking about PC Master Race, making assumptions just like you, that they brought up retarded arguments like hauling around desktops from place to place in order to somehow legitimize the limitations companies place on console hardware. Being who I am I felt the need to shut them down because I have a strong dislike for stupidity and an even stronger dislike for irrational arguments fueled by it.

Same as how I got my PS3; whenever I see a game worth playing.

lol. Okay. So you have a problem with the idea that these companies made a product and consumers bought them and are continuing to buy them. Sorry that economics are at work. Does it bother you that, despite Wendy's burgers using square (therefore bigger) patties, they are less popular than McDonald's? I mean, Wendy's burgers have less limitations on them; they are clearly the better choice. But, I guess the whole world doesn't know what it's missing.

People buy Tamagotchis. They will buy consoles because they are an attractive product for one reason or another and that's all they need. Get over it.

In the very sentence you quoted I stated that I don't have much of a problem with the consumer; that implies the consumer buying the product. So how—by all means do tell—did you get that I have a problem with the consumers buying the product? Don't put words into my mouth Strawman.

I have a problem with the people that produce the consoles and force-feed the consumer populace outdated technology for a ridiculous price, it is a moral injustice. I'm not going to just toss it aside as:

"well that people want it so I guess it's okay."

The Germans thought killing millions of innocent Jews was okay back in WW2; I guess it's what the people wanted so we should have just turned a blind eye to it right? Just because people think it's okay doesn't mean it's alright for it to continue going on or that I'm not going to have a problem with it and try to spell it out for others.

Just because Wendy's uses square burgers doesn't mean you're getting any more than McDonald's, you judge the value of meat by its weight and nutritional value; not by whether it's fucking square or round. The only reason it looks like you get 'more' at Wendy's is because the grillmen continuously press the sides down so the paddy will fill out the bun; if they didn't it'd end up being just 3" x 3" cube.

Point is that looks and style aren't directly correlated to functionality. You want a real burger? Go out and buy some from the store or from a local farmer, don't shovel the ones that massive corporations produce and fluff up down your throat. Judge food by it's nutritional value, not by the stupid gimmicks some company uses to sell it.

BOOM, Godwin.

You really don't understand how hardware/software development work, do you?

Maybe 3 years down the line only if there's a definite price drop and if there's more than 10 or so good exclusives.

I'm usually a MASTER RACE kinda guy, but I find my self disagreeing with Kestral a lot.If a system has exclusives I really want to play, I'm not going to pass them off because I can't play them in my all in one device.

completely voluntary exchange where both parties know or should know what they're getting =! scam

I wouldn't call myself a mindless sheep because I know exactly what the fuck I'm doing and not keeping alliance with one single platform. Wanting destroy consoles just seems pretty stupid since you want to limit the way people play and from who's service they voluntarily want to play for.

Also why is that you only mention games with high skill ceilings and normal skill floors, or having a delusion that they're all somehow on one platform? Games being highly competitive don't automatically make them enjoyable or "good". There are different games made to suit different people's preferences.

Being an insufferable idiot doesn't make you smart. Also, Gowin's law, seriously?

Oh boy, console fanboys hate of PCs already. I was just about to comment that I'm not sold on getting either system since I usually play PC and with the new consoles being very very similar to a low-mid range PC it should take minimal effort for any third party to port it to PC.

It mostly has to do with overall cost of the system for me (which I include online play for both PS and xbox) as well as things that make the overall cost cheaper over time. Steam sales for example save me TONS of money on getting games I may be interested in. With so many games multiplatform I'm not sure getting either console is worth it to me at this point or any point within the next two years at least. That and I tend to play more games that have definitive versions on PC. Why people play Minecraft on console I will never understand. There are so many mods to play around with and the new updates come first to the PC version. I'm not saying that you can't like the consoles, what I am saying is that I personally am not interested as of right now nor in the foreseeable future.

That unpopular opinion said, lets add some more shall we? The Wii U is the only console that holds my interest currently because it compliments rather than directly competes with my gaming PC. It also has at least twice the amount of exclusives. While it and Nintendo may get a lot of hate as of late, I don't care too much about sales. Just about fun games like Monster Hunter (which I've spent way too much time on already.)

It seems to go both ways from the looks of it. Which is fine, people should spend their money how they see fit.

I also love PC gaming and I know more often than not it's the clear winner, but some people are seriously obnoxious about it. I kinda consider myself an idort even though MS consoles don't really appeal to me.

As for the Wii U, it's alright and slowly picking up the pace on games being released, hopefully the price drop gets it a bigger install base which will attract more devs.

I am not raising the comparison with the motive of ending the argument; indeed it is also not hyperbole but a good fit with the explanation. You're just abusing Godwin's law in order to divert attention from the meaning of my argument and censor it.

I'm a systems architect and I have been hacking for many years, thanks. So what do you know yourself? Care to provide any backing to your statement? All of the logic I've put forward is perfectly sound, they are needlessly limited systems from a capability standpoint.

No, not it fucking isn't. And calling you out for being a dumbfuck isn't censorship.

Thanks for ignoring my rebuttal though.

If you are a systems architect as you claim you surely have the understanding that consoles are not "needlessly limited". At a certain point in development you have to stick with the hardware you got if you want to be able to optimize it.

People like to claim that the next-gen consoles will be released with outdated hardware, which is partially true. The hardware will be, looking at the industry, about a year to a year and a half old, which is quite a lot.
However, the latest graphic cards commercially available whip out about 1.3-1.5TFLOPS, while both consoles will rest around 1.8TFLOPS. So at this point in time the consoles do in fact whip out better performance with older hardware. Ah, the power of being able to optimize. (This is all relative to using a single GPU alongside a single processor. Obviously you would, theoretically, be able to build a machine capable of overshadowing the next-gen consoles and possibly the next-next gen consoles with today's hardware, but that's besides the point.)
Of course, you could, theoretically, rebuild the consoles every single month with new hardware, optimize as much as you had the time for and release, but not only would the consoles have less performance, last a shorter amount of time, have more bugs etc. they would also be more expensive and it would harder for developers to fit their game engines into the new firmware.

I'm not even in this industry, but if you have any understanding of how software/hardware development and optimization goes this should be common sense rather than well kept industry secrets.

Also: Releasing outdated hardware is not comparable to genocide, just saying.

I will more than likely get a ps4 since I have always had sony's products, However like I did with the vita, I will wait til there are at least 3 or more games for that specific console that look interesting to me before I will buy it. This excludes the games that will be for both ps3 and ps4 as I can simply play them on my ps3

I used the comparison to explain an ethical concept, I wasn't relating releasing outdated hardware to acts of genocide. The point of the comparison is that just because people think something is right doesn't mean it actually is, nothing more; nothing less. I've already stated multiple times I don't have much of a problem with the hardware consoles use; I have a problem with the software. Allow me to reinstate the subject of my complaint which I am now having to iterate yet again.





Everyone including you seem to think I'm raising the 'PC Master Race' debate over console hardware and it's inability to produce der berstest gruphics. I'm not raising a debate over whether or not PCs are better than consoles, I'm raising a point that console producers limit the software and thus the freedom the user is allowed to a gross extent. As I already stated the only reason I decided to rebuke the statements given by certain users over why a console would be better than a PC is because their logic was utterly flawed.

Though in lieu of your ranting I don't see why you think consoles have to be given brand new hardware and re-released every single time; there's this little thing called upgrading that's been going around for a few years now yeah? Given that a consoles motherboard keeps the same socket over time it wouldn't be all that difficult to design them to be compartmentalized, making hardware able to be easily swapped out given that a user needs to upgrade or if something malfunctions.



You didn't quote my post, I didn't get a notification, I didn't reply. Do you honestly think I have time to read every post in the thread or forum? The internet isn't my life; also, you might want to read up on what Godwin's law entails, maybe go back and look at the comparison I was making and the reason for doing it. The fact is that just because people think something is right doesn't always mean it is ethically so, that was the point I was making and just because I used Nazi Germany as an explanation doesn't mean it's invalidated. Godwin himself said he came up with the law simply to discourage the use of Nazi Germany as an object used in arguments, but not that it should be able to invalidate explanations, comparisons or entire arguments where a legitimate point is being made.



I do not want to destroy consoles or have them removed from the market, I want their producers to stop putting needless limitations on what users are able to do with them. But thanks for taking my argument out of context like everyone else has done so far.

I did, and you were essentially saying it was morally wrong for two parties to make an exchange for products you felt weren't up to your expectations.



VOLUNTARY EXCHANGE BETWEEN TWO PARTIES WHO ARE BOTH INFORMED BEFORE AND AFTER OF WHAT THEY'RE GETTING OUT OF THE DEAL.
Don't like what they have to offer? Cool, you won't be dragged out of your home and thrown into a govt camp for disagreeing or not forking out your cash.




Yes, it fucking does because it's NOT UNETHICAL.



IT'S NOT UNETHICAL. YOU'RE COMPLETELY FREE TO DISREGARD THOSE PRODUCTS.

I agree that sometimes producers of these products put limitations on their services that make me not want to do business with them. That still DOESN'T MAKE IT WRONG.

I like that with most PC you can choose from the OS you want, the multiple service providers (steam, origin, GoG, Desura, etc. etc.) or none, you can buy parts from whatever part maker you want, online services are usually better, there's more configuration possibilities when it comes audio, video and even gameplay. Sometimes some people save more money buy going PC instead of switching hardware every 7 or 6 years/buying 65usd games/paying 60usd for the online service.

You should've just gone with why you felt that PC was better, not call the practice of free trade(that doesn't include slavery or violence) unethical.

The fact that you couldn't understand why you're wrong is troubling.

My ethical outlook on technology is taken in lieu of the thoughts of the forefathers who invented electronic computing and the internet. In contrast with their perspectives and wishes what companies like Sony and Microsoft are doing is entirely unethical, it shows a complete lack of respect for the people who allowed their very corporations—though not every part of in Sony's case—to thrive and even exist. These are the same people who paved the way for the very video games you enjoy so much to exist as well. If you have any care in the world at all for the people who are responsible for your enjoyment you should take their wishes into ethical perspective.

I agree with this, consoles often step on the opposite of what Atanasoff, Bartik, Cerf and Kahn would have wanted their creations to be used for.

He does make a valid point, then again, a great majority of what's come out of their minds has been put to ill use. Though I guess that really doesn't change anything from an ethical perspective.