PC Gaming is NOT Dead - the new Xbox is just a crappy PC on the inside.

[eth0s]

The new Xbox 1 turns out to be a crappy PC under the hood.  Which tells me that PC gaming is not dead.  Eventually Xbox people must realize that they are using a really low-grade PC, and that everything would be better with a real PC, with an SSD, a real video card, and a real keyboard, which all can be had for ~ $750 (USD), which is cheaper than Xbox 1.  But then again, sheep will be sheep, and they always get sheared.



See the story here:  http://www.techspot.com/news/54775-xbox-one-teardown-reveals-standard-pc-hardware-components.html

[Pacifist]

Why do they still use physical cd drives? Look how much space that wastes

[Tym]

Who said PC gaming is dead?

u wrong, u so wrong

[metalliqaz]

I don't think I agree.  Doesn't matter what the hardware is.  A console is not a PC, they serve different roles.

The first Xbox actually WAS a PC inside.  It was a console, not a PC.

Consoles are standardized hardware that run a pre-selected, approved set of software.  They cater to families, casual gamers, and only partially to hardcore gamers.  They don't have keyboards, or mice, or user-facing OS-level features.  They about delivering specific content to everybody the same way.

So these days the hardware isn't unique.  Not surprising.  It's the software and the infrastructure that makes the platform.

[Melvang]

Why do they still use physical cd drives? Look how much space that wastes

Cost.  And from what I recall they actually have pretty bad ass vid cards.  Just not in the same realm of computing as desktop vid cards.  From what I recall in an article somewhere they are optimized very differently but still pretty good hardware on the video side that is.

[McWilloughby]

2007ish - all of my friends back home were begging me (the sole PC gamer in the group) to get an Xbox 360, didn't have the money and wanted a new PC anyway.

2012/13 - every holiday I have from Uni I've spent building gaming PCs for my friends back home who seem to have realised you get more for your money with a PC.

Not really sure where the PC gaming is dead talk comes from

[eth0s]

Who said PC gaming is dead?

u wrong, u so wrong

well, I didn't say PC gaming is dead.  The console gamers have been saying PC gaming is dead since about 2006.  And every year since then, PC gaming survives.  There was a rough patch there in about 2008-09, when it seemed like all the new games came out for the console, and then were "ported" to the PC.  But now I think the trend is finally reversing.  Except for GTA V, which will always be a console-first game.  And Resident Evil, I guess.  I hope the gaming public finally realizes how big of a rip-off this new Xbox is.

[Melvang]

2007ish - all of my friends back home were begging me (the sole PC gamer in the group) to get an Xbox 360, didn't have the money and wanted a new PC anyway.

2012/13 - every holiday I have from Uni I've spent building gaming PCs for my friends back home who seem to have realised you get more for your money with a PC.

Not really sure where the PC gaming is dead talk comes from

It probably comes from the fact that pre-built desktop PC sales are for the most part at an all time low.  I believe PC parts for enthusiasts are dropping a slight bit as well.

[Tym]

Who said PC gaming is dead?

u wrong, u so wrong

well, I didn't say PC gaming is dead.  The console gamers have been saying PC gaming is dead since about 2006.  And every year since then, PC gaming survives.  There was a rough patch there in about 2008-09, when it seemed like all the new games came out for the console, and then were "ported" to the PC.  But now I think the trend is finally reversing.  Except for GTA V, which will always be a console-first game.  And Resident Evil, I guess.  I hope the gaming public finally realizes how big of a rip-off this new Xbox is.

Sorry, I know you didn't say that. I was talking to who ever said that

[IvanIvanovich]

I am just looking forward to hopefully less lazy 'ports' to Windows since it's all x86-64 now.

[eth0s]

Who said PC gaming is dead?

u wrong, u so wrong

well, I didn't say PC gaming is dead.  The console gamers have been saying PC gaming is dead since about 2006.  And every year since then, PC gaming survives.  There was a rough patch there in about 2008-09, when it seemed like all the new games came out for the console, and then were "ported" to the PC.  But now I think the trend is finally reversing.  Except for GTA V, which will always be a console-first game.  And Resident Evil, I guess.  I hope the gaming public finally realizes how big of a rip-off this new Xbox is.

Sorry, I know you didn't say that. I was talking to who ever said that

No Problemo Señor!  At least we can agree that the Xbox Xsux.

[noisyturtle]

If anything, it's console gaming that's on the decline in the broad spectrum of things. Yes there are more people today who play games on consoles than say 15 years ago, but that number is only high due to the increased number of total gamers. The gap between PC and console players is closing due to many factors(absorbed is really the correct term here,) and by the next-next gen consoles as we know them will be all but relics in the market.

[tp4tissue]

Yup.. the Xbox is a PC in every way in terms of hardware..

The argument of Console/PC is really only semantics...

In general,, Console is an attempt to pimp software developers on part of Microsoft/ Sony/ Nintendo

On PC,,  the same pimping occurs with STEAM...


Yea.. u a *****.. what you gonna do...   

[noisyturtle]

Yup.. the Xbox is a PC in every way in terms of hardware..

The argument of Console/PC is really only semantics...

In general,, Console is an attempt to pimp software developers on part of Microsoft/ Sony/ Nintendo

On PC,,  the same pimping occurs with STEAM...


Yea.. u a *****.. what you gonna do...   

Show Image

That's why I do all my current console gaming on consoles made before 2000! You can actually tell you're playing a game made for that system as opposed to something that has greener pastures on the PC. And even then, when I play a console it's usually a SNES or Neo Geo anyway and barring dirty emulators, those systems have very distinct gamefeel personalities.

[baldgye]

I see eth0s is a resident genius, but unfortunately still hasn't managed to wrap his (obviously massive) brain around the concept of a video game console.

[Michael]

The main point of consoles is to appeal to a larger audience both in price, and accessibility. You can't build a PC that can push games the way the 360 or Xbox One can at that price point.


The graphics processing in the One is equivalent to a GTX 680, maybe more. That card alone would cost you almost the price of the Xbox One.


So yes, it is a PC inside, but a much more affordable one that people don't have to mess with.

[baldgye]

The main point of consoles is to appeal to a larger audience both in price, and accessibility. You can't build a PC that can push games the way the 360 or Xbox One can at that price point.


The graphics processing in the One is equivalent to a GTX 680, maybe more. That card alone would cost you almost the price of the Xbox One.


So yes, it is a PC inside, but a much more affordable one that people don't have to mess with.

I can see why your the 'HHKB Overlord'

[Michael]

The main point of consoles is to appeal to a larger audience both in price, and accessibility. You can't build a PC that can push games the way the 360 or Xbox One can at that price point.


The graphics processing in the One is equivalent to a GTX 680, maybe more. That card alone would cost you almost the price of the Xbox One.


So yes, it is a PC inside, but a much more affordable one that people don't have to mess with.

I can see why your the 'HHKB Overlord'

'you're'


And why is that?

[noisyturtle]

The main point of consoles is to appeal to a larger audience both in price, and accessibility. You can't build a PC that can push games the way the 360 or Xbox One can at that price point.


The graphics processing in the One is equivalent to a GTX 680, maybe more. That card alone would cost you almost the price of the Xbox One.


So yes, it is a PC inside, but a much more affordable one that people don't have to mess with.

My only argument is MS and Sony want to peruse the multimedia hub angle when everyone in America who would potentially buy a console already owns a PC that's already a multimedia hub. People are still thought locked into the notion that a game console has to be this separate entity from their lives than something 'practical' is, but as soon as folks wake up a shake off those preconceptions they'll see that their PC already does all those things. Companies would be better off selling a proprietary disk drive that hooks up to devices via USB and HDMI while giving developers minimum spec guidelines to ensure less powerful PCs can run it's games, but the option to max out settings as well if your PC can handle it.

[Michael]

The main point of consoles is to appeal to a larger audience both in price, and accessibility. You can't build a PC that can push games the way the 360 or Xbox One can at that price point.


The graphics processing in the One is equivalent to a GTX 680, maybe more. That card alone would cost you almost the price of the Xbox One.


So yes, it is a PC inside, but a much more affordable one that people don't have to mess with.

My only argument is MS and Sony want to peruse the multimedia hub angle when everyone in America who would potentially buy a console already owns a PC that's already a multimedia hub. People are still thought locked into the notion that a game console has to be this separate entity from their lives than something 'practical' is, but as soon as folks wake up a shake off those preconceptions they'll see that their PC already does all those things. Companies would be better off selling a proprietary disk drive that hooks up to devices via USB and HDMI while giving developers minimum spec guidelines to ensure less powerful PCs can run it's games, but the option to max out settings as well if your PC can handle it.

Well on the point of a PC already doing all of these things; yes and no. From a price perspective, which is the main argument for a console, setting up a PC to do all of these things would require more investment than just plopping down for a console in the first place. You are basically getting a full multimedia capable system that runs games at high resolution at an affordable (to most) price point.


Now, before anyone makes assumptions (as I think baldgye might have), I am a hardcore PC gamer and prefer it over a console any day. But even I can see the innate value in a console over a PC in the long run, or for people that don't want to have to upgrade to play the latest games in high resolution. But that might also be just me and my penchant for needing to upgrade all the time

[PointyFox]

The main point of consoles is to appeal to a larger audience both in price, and accessibility. You can't build a PC that can push games the way the 360 or Xbox One can at that price point.


The graphics processing in the One is equivalent to a GTX 680, maybe more. That card alone would cost you almost the price of the Xbox One.


So yes, it is a PC inside, but a much more affordable one that people don't have to mess with.

My only argument is MS and Sony want to peruse the multimedia hub angle when everyone in America who would potentially buy a console already owns a PC that's already a multimedia hub. People are still thought locked into the notion that a game console has to be this separate entity from their lives than something 'practical' is, but as soon as folks wake up a shake off those preconceptions they'll see that their PC already does all those things. Companies would be better off selling a proprietary disk drive that hooks up to devices via USB and HDMI while giving developers minimum spec guidelines to ensure less powerful PCs can run it's games, but the option to max out settings as well if your PC can handle it.

Well on the point of a PC already doing all of these things; yes and no. From a price perspective, which is the main argument for a console, setting up a PC to do all of these things would require more investment than just plopping down for a console in the first place. You are basically getting a full multimedia capable system that runs games at high resolution at an affordable (to most) price point.


Now, before anyone makes assumptions (as I think baldgye might have), I am a hardcore PC gamer and prefer it over a console any day. But even I can see the innate value in a console over a PC in the long run, or for people that don't want to have to upgrade to play the latest games in high resolution. But that might also be just me and my penchant for needing to upgrade all the time

PC hardware has recently been increasing in specs much faster than hardware requirements for games.  My GTX 560 can still handle any new game just fine as long as I don't make the settings ridiculous.

Consoles are just intentionally crippled PCs that appeal to parents and families because they are easier to control the content on than PCs.
The console developers know this and pay for exclusive titles as incentive for buying them.

PCs can also emulate games for most consoles anyway.

As I've said before:

Why are consoles crippled?

*Can't upgrade hardware
*Can't run most software
*Can't modify your game files
*Limited communications
*Limited peripherals
*Limited selection of games compared with PC
*Little to no free-to-play, homebrew, or indie
*Peripherals are console specific
*Software is console-specific
*Software is usually locked to a physical object to prevent copying
*Limited ability to run multiple programs or apps at the same time
*Consoles are not easily repairable
*FPS controls are better on PC
*More ways to purchase games and price competition
*Forced software, social media, and advertising

Basically consoles are meant to be disposable entertainment for children or people who don't have a decent PC.  The next console version comes out and suddenly your entire console, games, accessories, and peripherals are useless.

[Michael]

The main point of consoles is to appeal to a larger audience both in price, and accessibility. You can't build a PC that can push games the way the 360 or Xbox One can at that price point.


The graphics processing in the One is equivalent to a GTX 680, maybe more. That card alone would cost you almost the price of the Xbox One.


So yes, it is a PC inside, but a much more affordable one that people don't have to mess with.

My only argument is MS and Sony want to peruse the multimedia hub angle when everyone in America who would potentially buy a console already owns a PC that's already a multimedia hub. People are still thought locked into the notion that a game console has to be this separate entity from their lives than something 'practical' is, but as soon as folks wake up a shake off those preconceptions they'll see that their PC already does all those things. Companies would be better off selling a proprietary disk drive that hooks up to devices via USB and HDMI while giving developers minimum spec guidelines to ensure less powerful PCs can run it's games, but the option to max out settings as well if your PC can handle it.

Well on the point of a PC already doing all of these things; yes and no. From a price perspective, which is the main argument for a console, setting up a PC to do all of these things would require more investment than just plopping down for a console in the first place. You are basically getting a full multimedia capable system that runs games at high resolution at an affordable (to most) price point.


Now, before anyone makes assumptions (as I think baldgye might have), I am a hardcore PC gamer and prefer it over a console any day. But even I can see the innate value in a console over a PC in the long run, or for people that don't want to have to upgrade to play the latest games in high resolution. But that might also be just me and my penchant for needing to upgrade all the time

PC hardware has recently been increasing in specs much faster than hardware requirements for games.  My GTX 560 can still handle any new game just fine as long as I don't make the settings ridiculous.

Consoles are just intentionally crippled PCs that appeal to parents and families because they are easier to control the content on than PCs.
The console developers know this and pay for exclusive titles as incentive for buying them.

PCs can also emulate games for most consoles anyway.

As I've said before:

Why are consoles crippled?

*Can't upgrade hardware
*Can't run most software
*Can't modify your game files
*Limited communications
*Limited peripherals
*Limited selection of games compared with PC
*Little to no free-to-play, homebrew, or indie
*Peripherals are console specific
*Software is console-specific
*Software is usually locked to a physical object to prevent copying
*Limited ability to run multiple programs or apps at the same time
*Consoles are not easily repairable
*FPS controls are better on PC
*More ways to purchase games and price competition

Basically consoles are meant to be disposable entertainment for children or people who don't have a decent PC.  The next console version comes out and suddenly your entire console, games, accessories, and peripherals are useless.

Preaching to the choir.


And on the point of 'next console version makes your current one useless' is not true. I have no plans on getting an Xbox One over my 360 for quite a long time. GTA V being the biggest reason. I have tons of games for the 360, so I am well invested in it and see no need or reason to upgrade.

[baldgye]

The main point of consoles is to appeal to a larger audience both in price, and accessibility. You can't build a PC that can push games the way the 360 or Xbox One can at that price point.


The graphics processing in the One is equivalent to a GTX 680, maybe more. That card alone would cost you almost the price of the Xbox One.


So yes, it is a PC inside, but a much more affordable one that people don't have to mess with.

I can see why your the 'HHKB Overlord'

'you're'

lol

[Malphas]

"PC gaming is dead" is something people said  in the early 2000's at the apex of the 6th generation of consoles, into the beginning of the 7th. Around that time the desktop PC started dwindling and everyone bought laptops instead which were incapable of running games; console games were simpler than the relative pain-in-the-ass of installing games to PC and dealing with DRM, multiple discs and downloading patches on slow connections; software/hardware developers had worked out how to overcome the limitations of console controls using cover systems, analog sticks, etc.

Since then Steam has become the dominant format for PC gaming, and made it simpler than consoles; consoles in turn have gotten more complicated and adopted some of the hassles that were previously limited to PCs. The fact game engine demands have been largely pegged to the generation of consoles mean that even your standard, cheapo laptop can probably run most games these days which broadens the userbase massively. PC gaming has become more inclusive with indie titles and more diverse genres (think things like the Tropico series, Sins of a Solar Empire, Minecraft, TellTale games, etc.) that appeal to non-traditional gaming demographics like women and more mature people whilst console gaming is still largely dominated by the male teenage/twentysomething "lol ***ut!" CoD crowd.

I really think the "PC gaming is dead" mantra lost all shred of relevance in around 2008. Developers know this, that's why near every title is multiformat on release including PC, as opposed to the early half of the last decade where the PC was given a shoddy port 6-18 months later, or forgotten altogether. The Steam userbase dwarfs the sales of consoles put together, and the PC more often than not comes out on top out of the three main formats (PC, Xbox, PS) although doesn't beat the console sales collectively (yet).

[tp4tissue]

HAHAHHAHAHAHAHA


GTX 680 .... realllllly..... 

[rowdy]

So do they run a cut-down version of Windows?

Anyone seen a "blah blah blah press F1 to continue" boot message?

[RabRhee]

The more consoles become based on PC hardware, the better for true PC gaming it will be. The console market has so many skilled games producers that them jamming on pure PC kit can only help, with port overs like Ivan says, but also with pure knowledge of what the kit can do.

Console programmers often push the boundaries more because they have to. Some of the most gifted programmers of old were the ones working on slow or outdated kit. When some arcade hit showed up and every home computer wanted a version, the poor programmer trying to reproduce Hard Drivin' on the spectrum had a harder job to do it well than the Amiga guy. They sometimes did amazing things with crap hardware.

A lower spec console does have the ability to outperform a PC of maybe 20% or even better spec simply because writing for a multiplatform like the PC causes a significant stack of overhead writing to account for all the foibles of varied hardware, not to mention near-future hardware, OS variances, hell even mouse varieties. Sure drivers should make that all easy . Of course throwing big bucks at a PC build will always be better. There is room for both.

[YoungMichael88]

This whole topic is far too subjective to have a definitive "right" or "wrong".
If you like console gaming for any reason at all then you're "right".
If you like PC gaming for any reason at all then you're also "right".
If you like both for different reasons then guess what?! You're "right"!

So I'm gonna enjoy Both BF4 and COD  (yea I enjoy both so what?) on my PS4 and SC2, LOL and Civ 5 on my computer. And I'm gonna have one hell of a time doing both!

Happy gaming to you all. No matter your poison! 

[rowdy]

Provided the hardware is halfway capable, it gives game-authors a fixed platform with known limits to target.

As opposed to writing for PCs in general where some hardware is considerably more powerful than other, and you have to support everything inbetween.

[eth0s]

Maybe we should just go back to this?



Anybody remember the Atari 2600?

[SpAmRaY]

^^ I'd still play it!

[jwaz]

I don't think I agree.  Doesn't matter what the hardware is.  A console is not a PC, they serve different roles.

The first Xbox actually WAS a PC inside.  It was a console, not a PC.

Consoles are standardized hardware that run a pre-selected, approved set of software.  They cater to families, casual gamers, and only partially to hardcore gamers.  They don't have keyboards, or mice, or user-facing OS-level features.  They about delivering specific content to everybody the same way.

So these days the hardware isn't unique.  Not surprising.  It's the software and the infrastructure that makes the platform.

Woah, thank you. Why is this even still a debate?

[eth0s]

I don't think I agree.  Doesn't matter what the hardware is.  A console is not a PC, they serve different roles.

The first Xbox actually WAS a PC inside.  It was a console, not a PC.

Consoles are standardized hardware that run a pre-selected, approved set of software.  They cater to families, casual gamers, and only partially to hardcore gamers.  They don't have keyboards, or mice, or user-facing OS-level features.  They about delivering specific content to everybody the same way.

So these days the hardware isn't unique.  Not surprising.  It's the software and the infrastructure that makes the platform.

Actually this is pretty depressing.  To me, you are describing an Orwellian nightmare-box, all they need to do is add a spycam that peeps into your living room for the NSA and it really is a big brother tube, they already mine your data and read your emails, so why not, I guess.

Also if the new Xbox costs more than a budget gaming PC, why bother with it?  Unless you are a mindless drone, looking for the same dumbed-down "specific content [delivered] to everybody the same way".  I'm not arguing with you, I'm just saddened that people buy the Xbox.  It seems like a rip-off to me.  And a way to conform.

[Michael]

I don't think I agree.  Doesn't matter what the hardware is.  A console is not a PC, they serve different roles.

The first Xbox actually WAS a PC inside.  It was a console, not a PC.

Consoles are standardized hardware that run a pre-selected, approved set of software.  They cater to families, casual gamers, and only partially to hardcore gamers.  They don't have keyboards, or mice, or user-facing OS-level features.  They about delivering specific content to everybody the same way.

So these days the hardware isn't unique.  Not surprising.  It's the software and the infrastructure that makes the platform.

Actually this is pretty depressing.  To me, you are describing an Orwellian nightmare-box, all they need to do is add a spycam that peeps into your living room for the NSA and it really is a big brother tube, they already mine your data and read your emails, so why not, I guess.

Also if the new Xbox costs more than a budget gaming PC, why bother with it?  Unless you are a mindless drone, looking for the same dumbed-down "specific content [delivered] to everybody the same way".  I'm not arguing with you, I'm just saddened that people buy the Xbox.  It seems like a rip-off to me.  And a way to conform.

This is probably the most thoughtless response I have heard from you. You can do better (maybe)

[PointyFox]

I don't think I agree.  Doesn't matter what the hardware is.  A console is not a PC, they serve different roles.

The first Xbox actually WAS a PC inside.  It was a console, not a PC.

Consoles are standardized hardware that run a pre-selected, approved set of software.  They cater to families, casual gamers, and only partially to hardcore gamers.  They don't have keyboards, or mice, or user-facing OS-level features.  They about delivering specific content to everybody the same way.

So these days the hardware isn't unique.  Not surprising.  It's the software and the infrastructure that makes the platform.

Actually this is pretty depressing.  To me, you are describing an Orwellian nightmare-box, all they need to do is add a spycam that peeps into your living room for the NSA and it really is a big brother tube, they already mine your data and read your emails, so why not, I guess.

Also if the new Xbox costs more than a budget gaming PC, why bother with it?  Unless you are a mindless drone, looking for the same dumbed-down "specific content [delivered] to everybody the same way".  I'm not arguing with you, I'm just saddened that people buy the Xbox.  It seems like a rip-off to me.  And a way to conform.

Reminds me of what Google is doing now with Google+.  "Oh you want to comment on something?  You'll have to set up your Google+ profile, including your real name, which will be displayed on all your posts.  We will also keep a log of everything you do displayed on your new Google+ live feed".

[eth0s]

I don't think I agree.  Doesn't matter what the hardware is.  A console is not a PC, they serve different roles.

The first Xbox actually WAS a PC inside.  It was a console, not a PC.

Consoles are standardized hardware that run a pre-selected, approved set of software.  They cater to families, casual gamers, and only partially to hardcore gamers.  They don't have keyboards, or mice, or user-facing OS-level features.  They about delivering specific content to everybody the same way.

So these days the hardware isn't unique.  Not surprising.  It's the software and the infrastructure that makes the platform.

Actually this is pretty depressing.  To me, you are describing an Orwellian nightmare-box, all they need to do is add a spycam that peeps into your living room for the NSA and it really is a big brother tube, they already mine your data and read your emails, so why not, I guess.

Also if the new Xbox costs more than a budget gaming PC, why bother with it?  Unless you are a mindless drone, looking for the same dumbed-down "specific content [delivered] to everybody the same way".  I'm not arguing with you, I'm just saddened that people buy the Xbox.  It seems like a rip-off to me.  And a way to conform.

This is probably the most thoughtless response I have heard from you. You can do better (maybe)

lol.

Thoughtless?  how?  Like devoid of thought?  Or inconsiderate?  If you mean inconsiderate, then I apologize, since I didn't mean to offend any Xbox 1 fans.  I guess I should have said the Xbox 1 is not for me, and left it at that.

If you mean devoid of thought, well, I guess it's true that I didn't think much about the Xbox 1.  Baldgye might be right that I didn't understand the concept of the console when I started this thread, but maybe I am beginning to understand what the console really represents.  And what the Xbox 1 represents is the current state of middle-brow culture in America, which is mired in mediocrity, hampered by pusillanimity, and hood-winked by false comfort, all of which promotes a slavish conformity to Microsoft and the dictates of a billionaire plutocrat like Bill Gates.  I guess I am beginning to lose faith in the broad swath of the middle of the American people.  They have lost their fire, and their independence.  Since when are Americans so easy to accept the easy conformity of the Xbox?  Unlike other cultures and other countries at other times, the great American middle never gave up before, and never simply embraced defeat.  They fought the British in 1776, and the Canadians/ British in 1812, and the Rebel South in 1864, and the crazy Kaiser in 1918, and the spectre of financial ruination in 1932, and the evil of fascism in 1941, and the Racism and social injustice of the '50's and '60's, the Cold War in the '80's, grunge music in the '90's, but then it stopped.  Now in 2013, there seems to be no middle.  Nothing to staunch the slide.  It seems to me that when Steve Jobs died on October 11, 2011, a part of the American spirit died as well. 

[Michael]

lol.

Thoughtless?  how?  Like devoid of thought?  Or inconsiderate?  If you mean inconsiderate, then I apologize, since I didn't mean to offend any Xbox 1 fans.  I guess I should have said the Xbox 1 is not for me, and left it at that.

If you mean devoid of thought, well, I guess it's true that I didn't think much about the Xbox 1.  Baldgye might be right that I didn't understand the concept of the console when I started this thread, but maybe I am beginning to understand what the console really represents.  And what the Xbox 1 represents is the current state of middle-brow culture in America, which is mired in mediocrity, hampered by pusillanimity, and hood-winked by false comfort, all of which promotes a slavish conformity to Microsoft and the dictates of a billionaire plutocrat like Bill Gates.  I guess I am beginning to lose faith in the broad swath of the middle of the American people.  They have lost their fire, and their independence.  Since when are Americans so easy to accept the easy conformity of the Xbox?  Unlike other cultures and other countries at other times, the great American middle never gave up before, and never simply embraced defeat.  They fought the British in 1776, and the Canadians/ British in 1812, and the Rebel South in 1864, and the crazy Kaiser in 1918, and the spectre of financial ruination in 1932, and the evil of fascism in 1941, and the Racism and social injustice of the '50's and '60's, the Cold War in the '80's, grunge music in the '90's, but then it stopped.  Now in 2013, there seems to be no middle.  Nothing to staunch the slide.  It seems to me that when Steve Jobs died on October 11, 2011, a part of the American spirit died as well.

What does any of this have to do with the subject of the thread? I think referring to this as a tangent, would be a severe understatement.


I think metalliqaz summed it up pretty nicely. /bravo

[tp4tissue]

This whole topic is far too subjective to have a definitive "right" or "wrong".
If you like console gaming for any reason at all then you're "right".
If you like PC gaming for any reason at all then you're also "right".
If you like both for different reasons then guess what?! You're "right"!

So I'm gonna enjoy Both BF4 and COD  (yea I enjoy both so what?) on my PS4 and SC2, LOL and Civ 5 on my computer. And I'm gonna have one hell of a time doing both!

Happy gaming to you all. No matter your poison! 

I am torn on the BF4 issue.. because between PC and Console they're 2 completely different games..  The play style will be completely different even given the same map..

Because the choke point on PC is going to be much larger than on Console..

[eth0s]

lol.

Thoughtless?  how?  Like devoid of thought?  Or inconsiderate?  If you mean inconsiderate, then I apologize, since I didn't mean to offend any Xbox 1 fans.  I guess I should have said the Xbox 1 is not for me, and left it at that.

If you mean devoid of thought, well, I guess it's true that I didn't think much about the Xbox 1.  Baldgye might be right that I didn't understand the concept of the console when I started this thread, but maybe I am beginning to understand what the console really represents.  And what the Xbox 1 represents is the current state of middle-brow culture in America, which is mired in mediocrity, hampered by pusillanimity, and hood-winked by false comfort, all of which promotes a slavish conformity to Microsoft and the dictates of a billionaire plutocrat like Bill Gates.  I guess I am beginning to lose faith in the broad swath of the middle of the American people.  They have lost their fire, and their independence.  Since when are Americans so easy to accept the easy conformity of the Xbox?  Unlike other cultures and other countries at other times, the great American middle never gave up before, and never simply embraced defeat.  They fought the British in 1776, and the Canadians/ British in 1812, and the Rebel South in 1864, and the crazy Kaiser in 1918, and the spectre of financial ruination in 1932, and the evil of fascism in 1941, and the Racism and social injustice of the '50's and '60's, the Cold War in the '80's, grunge music in the '90's, but then it stopped.  Now in 2013, there seems to be no middle.  Nothing to staunch the slide.  It seems to me that when Steve Jobs died on October 11, 2011, a part of the American spirit died as well.

What does any of this have to do with the subject of the thread? I think referring to this as a tangent, would be a severe understatement.


I think metalliqaz summed it up pretty nicely. /bravo

How can I be tangential to my own thread?  I am the ultimate authority on what I am saying.  And I am not tangential. 

But seriously, what I am saying is that I agreed with metalliqaz.   But his comment made me feel even worse about the Xbox than I did before, because it made me realize how bad the Xbox really is.  The Xbox, or the console in general, is a standardized (i.e., cheap) set of hardware running a standardized (i.e., limited) set of software, delivering a standardized (i.e., controlled) set of info-tainment to the middle of America.  Maybe I am an extreme person, or a border-line conspiracist, but that sounds like a very dangerous combination to me.  Microsoft is not selling you a window on the world, they are making you pay for your own shackle and a GPS tracker that will track everything you do with the Xbox, from shopping to movie-viewing to gaming to your political viewpoint.  You already live in a world controlled by a shockingly tiny number of plutocrats:  you already get all of your news from one of 4 billionaires.  You borrow your mortgage loan from one of about 20 billionaires.  You get your software from one of 4 billionaires.  And now you can be watched more easily for signs of defiance, deviance from the group-think, or other forms of non-conformity, through your Xbox.  The Xbox is dangerous, and it's the worst kind of danger, because it's insidious.  It invites itself into your home, and you welcome it, because it's so easy, and seems so harmless.  I thought Americans had an innate revulsion to this sort of thing, but apparently not.  Old George Orwell warned about a plutocratic government that keeps you frightened with a perpetual war, and that spies on you through a device that it installs in your home, that you are forced to keep on every minute of every day, that feeds you family entertainment and "news", all while gathering information about you, and gauging your propensity for independent thought and resistance to the government's policies.  That sounds like science fiction, until you think about the capability of the Xbox 1.   

[Michael]

lol.

Thoughtless?  how?  Like devoid of thought?  Or inconsiderate?  If you mean inconsiderate, then I apologize, since I didn't mean to offend any Xbox 1 fans.  I guess I should have said the Xbox 1 is not for me, and left it at that.

If you mean devoid of thought, well, I guess it's true that I didn't think much about the Xbox 1.  Baldgye might be right that I didn't understand the concept of the console when I started this thread, but maybe I am beginning to understand what the console really represents.  And what the Xbox 1 represents is the current state of middle-brow culture in America, which is mired in mediocrity, hampered by pusillanimity, and hood-winked by false comfort, all of which promotes a slavish conformity to Microsoft and the dictates of a billionaire plutocrat like Bill Gates.  I guess I am beginning to lose faith in the broad swath of the middle of the American people.  They have lost their fire, and their independence.  Since when are Americans so easy to accept the easy conformity of the Xbox?  Unlike other cultures and other countries at other times, the great American middle never gave up before, and never simply embraced defeat.  They fought the British in 1776, and the Canadians/ British in 1812, and the Rebel South in 1864, and the crazy Kaiser in 1918, and the spectre of financial ruination in 1932, and the evil of fascism in 1941, and the Racism and social injustice of the '50's and '60's, the Cold War in the '80's, grunge music in the '90's, but then it stopped.  Now in 2013, there seems to be no middle.  Nothing to staunch the slide.  It seems to me that when Steve Jobs died on October 11, 2011, a part of the American spirit died as well.

What does any of this have to do with the subject of the thread? I think referring to this as a tangent, would be a severe understatement.


I think metalliqaz summed it up pretty nicely. /bravo

How can I be tangential to my own thread?  I am the ultimate authority on what I am saying.  And I am not tangential. 

But seriously, what I am saying is that I agreed with metalliqaz.   But his comment made me feel even worse about the Xbox than I did before, because it made me realize how bad the Xbox really is.  The Xbox, or the console in general, is a standardized (i.e., cheap) set of hardware running a standardized (i.e., limited) set of software, delivering a standardized (i.e., controlled) set of info-tainment to the middle of America.  Maybe I am an extreme person, or a border-line conspiracist, but that sounds like a very dangerous combination to me.  Microsoft is not selling you a window on the world, they are making you pay for your own shackle and a GPS tracker that will track everything you do with the Xbox, from shopping to movie-viewing to gaming to your political viewpoint.  You already live in a world controlled by a shockingly tiny number of plutocrats:  you already get all of your news from one of 4 billionaires.  You borrow your mortgage loan from one of about 20 billionaires.  You get your software from one of 4 billionaires.  And now you can be watched more easily for signs of defiance, deviance from the group-think, or other forms of non-conformity, through your Xbox.  The Xbox is dangerous, and it's the worst kind of danger, because it's insidious.  It invites itself into your home, and you welcome it, because it's so easy, and seems so harmless.  I thought Americans had an innate revulsion to this sort of thing, but apparently not.  Old George Orwell warned about a plutocratic government that keeps you frightened with a perpetual war, and that spies on you through a device that it installs in your home, that you are forced to keep on every minute of every day, that feeds you family entertainment and "news", all while gathering information about you, and gauging your propensity for independent thought and resistance to the government's policies.  That sounds like science fiction, until you think about the capability of the Xbox 1.

[eth0s]

lol.

Thoughtless?  how?  Like devoid of thought?  Or inconsiderate?  If you mean inconsiderate, then I apologize, since I didn't mean to offend any Xbox 1 fans.  I guess I should have said the Xbox 1 is not for me, and left it at that.

If you mean devoid of thought, well, I guess it's true that I didn't think much about the Xbox 1.  Baldgye might be right that I didn't understand the concept of the console when I started this thread, but maybe I am beginning to understand what the console really represents.  And what the Xbox 1 represents is the current state of middle-brow culture in America, which is mired in mediocrity, hampered by pusillanimity, and hood-winked by false comfort, all of which promotes a slavish conformity to Microsoft and the dictates of a billionaire plutocrat like Bill Gates.  I guess I am beginning to lose faith in the broad swath of the middle of the American people.  They have lost their fire, and their independence.  Since when are Americans so easy to accept the easy conformity of the Xbox?  Unlike other cultures and other countries at other times, the great American middle never gave up before, and never simply embraced defeat.  They fought the British in 1776, and the Canadians/ British in 1812, and the Rebel South in 1864, and the crazy Kaiser in 1918, and the spectre of financial ruination in 1932, and the evil of fascism in 1941, and the Racism and social injustice of the '50's and '60's, the Cold War in the '80's, grunge music in the '90's, but then it stopped.  Now in 2013, there seems to be no middle.  Nothing to staunch the slide.  It seems to me that when Steve Jobs died on October 11, 2011, a part of the American spirit died as well.

What does any of this have to do with the subject of the thread? I think referring to this as a tangent, would be a severe understatement.


I think metalliqaz summed it up pretty nicely. /bravo

How can I be tangential to my own thread?  I am the ultimate authority on what I am saying.  And I am not tangential. 

But seriously, what I am saying is that I agreed with metalliqaz.   But his comment made me feel even worse about the Xbox than I did before, because it made me realize how bad the Xbox really is.  The Xbox, or the console in general, is a standardized (i.e., cheap) set of hardware running a standardized (i.e., limited) set of software, delivering a standardized (i.e., controlled) set of info-tainment to the middle of America.  Maybe I am an extreme person, or a border-line conspiracist, but that sounds like a very dangerous combination to me.  Microsoft is not selling you a window on the world, they are making you pay for your own shackle and a GPS tracker that will track everything you do with the Xbox, from shopping to movie-viewing to gaming to your political viewpoint.  You already live in a world controlled by a shockingly tiny number of plutocrats:  you already get all of your news from one of 4 billionaires.  You borrow your mortgage loan from one of about 20 billionaires.  You get your software from one of 4 billionaires.  And now you can be watched more easily for signs of defiance, deviance from the group-think, or other forms of non-conformity, through your Xbox.  The Xbox is dangerous, and it's the worst kind of danger, because it's insidious.  It invites itself into your home, and you welcome it, because it's so easy, and seems so harmless.  I thought Americans had an innate revulsion to this sort of thing, but apparently not.  Old George Orwell warned about a plutocratic government that keeps you frightened with a perpetual war, and that spies on you through a device that it installs in your home, that you are forced to keep on every minute of every day, that feeds you family entertainment and "news", all while gathering information about you, and gauging your propensity for independent thought and resistance to the government's policies.  That sounds like science fiction, until you think about the capability of the Xbox 1.

Show Image

Well, you can laugh at me now.  But wait 'till the thought police come busting down your door.  Who will be laughing then?  (Well not me, because they will come for me first.)

[YoungMichael88]

I am torn on the BF4 issue.. because between PC and Console they're 2 completely different games..  The play style will be completely different even given the same map..

Even more reason for consoles to still exist, no? The fact that the same game on console and PC will feel and play differently? It's just another proof that this is all way too subjective.

As far as the BF4 vs COD debate goes (and I know this is off topic), I got COD because EA forced Dice to push out BF4 way too early and the result was a broken game nowhere near ready for market and basically unplayable. I was tired of sitting around waiting for them to fix it. I gave it a week. Now that may not sound like a long time but it is when you give $60 to a company and find out that they KNEW the thing didn't work and they threw it on the shelves anyway. That is the mark of a terrible company. This was my first experience with the Battlefield series and it was a horrible one to say the least. I wanted to like it and to be blown away but instead I couldn't even try the game. I don't want to blame dice for any of this because I'm fairly certain that it would be EA who would make that kind of push through quality control just to beat COD to market and take our hard earned money with no concern for the customer what so ever.

[JaccoW]

Even though I own a PC that has been able to play pretty much everything and a laptop I bought last year that even outperforms it I can still see the appeal of the Xbox One.
I would love one of those as a media machine and to play games together with friends in the same room. But mostly the media part.

Will I play certain games on PC? Yes, of course. Will I prefer to own certain games on Console? Probably.

[PointyFox]

Even though I own a PC that has been able to play pretty much everything and a laptop I bought last year that even outperforms it I can still see the appeal of the Xbox One.
I would love one of those as a media machine and to play games together with friends in the same room. But mostly the media part.

Will I play certain games on PC? Yes, of course. Will I prefer to own certain games on Console? Probably.

You can use a PC to play media or play games together with friends on a television.

[YoungMichael88]

Computers aren't connected to TVs in every home. It would be a pain in the ass to have to move your desktop every time you want to play a game in the living room.

[Malphas]

SteamOS will let you stream over your LAN to your TV so you can play Windows PC games at whatever settings your gaming PC allows, even though the SteamOS device itself could potentially be a small, inexpensive box with an ARM processor.

[TheFlyingRaccoon]

Everyone stop fighting and watch this video. Linus makes some good points.

[Badwrench]

Oh man, reading the comments for that one is great! 

Good comparison.  I am glad that he brought in the 360 to the picture, and that they were very subjective giving the pros and cons of each.  It pretty much comes down to what titles you want to play, and if you want/care about any additional features each system. 

[trentva]

ps4 will most likely be the future of console gaming...

[rowdy]

Is it just me, or does anyone else see "XBONE" as "X bone"?

Or maybe it is supposed to be "cross bone" as in pirates?