08-30-2017 01:33 PM
505 ... 7891011 ...
tools
  1. jonnaver's Avatar
    I was at Fan Expo today and got to tinker around the Xbox section for a while. Couldn't even barely move in the PlayStation section because it was packed. Looks like Sony is just owning the console war this gen.
    08-30-2014 03:12 PM
  2. TaliZorah's Avatar
    I got an Xbox One. It does everything I want and has / will have all the games I want. I could care less if PS sells more consoles. Xbox beat them last gen. Competion only drives each company to do better and only the gamers benefit. Be a gamer, not a fanboy.
    FearL0rd and MaxyBley like this.
    08-30-2014 03:33 PM
  3. jonnaver's Avatar
    It was a much closer thing last gen.this gen has been a massive lead for Sony so far
    08-30-2014 04:23 PM
  4. Crasstoe's Avatar
    I said it earlier I'll say it again, wait til the Halo MC collection is released, it's got a huge following and 4 games remastered will sell the Xbox like only halo can.
    Sent from my Nokia Lumia 1020 using Tapatalk
    08-31-2014 03:51 AM
  5. unstoppablekem's Avatar
    People should realize that the people who work in the Xbox and PlayStation edition are not as extreme fanboys as Xbox and PS extremists, who say everything good about their system and how the other can't do anything better.

    For example, I see the Xbox and PS guys tweeting each other a lot, in a nice way.
    08-31-2014 11:20 AM
  6. TaliZorah's Avatar
    It was a much closer thing last gen.this gen has been a massive lead for Sony so far
    And Xbox had a massive lead on PS the first few years of last gen as well. Big deal.
    MaxyBley likes this.
    08-31-2014 10:35 PM
  7. Keith Wallace's Avatar
    And Xbox had a massive lead on PS the first few years of last gen as well. Big deal.
    The PS3 launched a year later for $200 more because of desirable new tech (Blu-Ray, which was a plus for the console near the end, when Xbox 360 games ended up on 2-3 discs). These consoles launched just a few weeks apart, and the One came at a higher price point most were not interested in paying for. Plus, once the PS3 dropped to a competitive price, the battle moved to the Sony side, while the One's price drop has not resulted in anything close to that through the first few months.

    The situations aren't directly comparable.
    unstoppablekem likes this.
    08-31-2014 11:52 PM
  8. unstoppablekem's Avatar
    The PS3 launched a year later for $200 more because of desirable new tech (Blu-Ray, which was a plus for the console near the end, when Xbox 360 games ended up on 2-3 discs). These consoles launched just a few weeks apart, and the One came at a higher price point most were not interested in paying for. Plus, once the PS3 dropped to a competitive price, the battle moved to the Sony side, while the One's price drop has not resulted in anything close to that through the first few months.

    The situations aren't directly comparable.
    I seriously think if the console w/o kinect is priced at $350, it would sell better. Not just because it's another price drop, because it needs to be. It's the same price as the PS4, which you have to admit, has better specs for the same price ($400). If it is $350, it can sell a lot better, and regular consumers (NOT fanboys of a platform, etc) can have a reason to buy it over the PS4. I think the Wii U is $350, and people will have less reasons to buy PS4's, as the Xbox is cheaper. I doubt it would take away from the Wii U sales though. The Wii U will sell even if it was $400, as its exclusives are amazing. Smash Bros, Mario Cart, etc.
    09-01-2014 01:29 AM
  9. TaliZorah's Avatar
    The PS3 launched a year later for $200 more because of desirable new tech (Blu-Ray, which was a plus for the console near the end, when Xbox 360 games ended up on 2-3 discs). These consoles launched just a few weeks apart, and the One came at a higher price point most were not interested in paying for. Plus, once the PS3 dropped to a competitive price, the battle moved to the Sony side, while the One's price drop has not resulted in anything close to that through the first few months.

    The situations aren't directly comparable.
    It doesnt matter what the reasons are. The point was that one company had a big lead on the other in the beginning. Different reasons why that is this gen compared to last is moot unless it has a direct effect on the situation at the end of the generation which we pronably wont know for 7-10 years.

    Also, once the PS dropped in price the "battle" never went to Sonys side. They saw better sales but thats about it.
    09-01-2014 06:44 AM
  10. rex.reyesiii's Avatar
    I seriously think if the console w/o kinect is priced at $350, it would sell better. Not just because it's another price drop, because it needs to be. It's the same price as the PS4, which you have to admit, has better specs for the same price ($400). If it is $350, it can sell a lot better, and regular consumers (NOT fanboys of a platform, etc) can have a reason to buy it over the PS4. I think the Wii U is $350, and people will have less reasons to buy PS4's, as the Xbox is cheaper. I doubt it would take away from the Wii U sales though. The Wii U will sell even if it was $400, as its exclusives are amazing. Smash Bros, Mario Cart, etc.
    Nahh, the reason MS was banking on was the "other" features besides the gaming. That extra dollars is for those features. I don't think MS will cut those prices for now.

    If there are regular consumers who are interested in those features besides gaming then it will sell more.
    09-01-2014 06:51 AM
  11. Keith Wallace's Avatar
    I seriously think if the console w/o kinect is priced at $350, it would sell better. Not just because it's another price drop, because it needs to be. It's the same price as the PS4, which you have to admit, has better specs for the same price ($400). If it is $350, it can sell a lot better, and regular consumers (NOT fanboys of a platform, etc) can have a reason to buy it over the PS4. I think the Wii U is $350, and people will have less reasons to buy PS4's, as the Xbox is cheaper. I doubt it would take away from the Wii U sales though. The Wii U will sell even if it was $400, as its exclusives are amazing. Smash Bros, Mario Cart, etc.
    The Wii U is $300, and it comes with NSMBU and SLU. It most certainly would not sell worth crap at $300. I personally got it because it was a cheap acquisition (long story), but if the price was $100 higher, I wouldn't have touched it.

    Of course the One would sell better if it cost less, that's how economics works. I do agree, though, that the price SHOULD get below the PS4's to give the general, third-party gamer (those whose main interests are CoD and BF and AC and the other major third-party releases) a reason to accept the inferior hardware/visuals/performance that has occurred with some titles. The problem is, the profit margin was almost nothing on the hardware to begin with. A decent chunk of those miniscule profits came from the Kinect's inclusion, so taking it out made the console hardware a money loser, most likely. Eating another $50 per-console with a price drop would make the hardware tougher to justify as a long-term investment. Plus, if they dropped the Kinecless SKU to $350, they'd almost certainly have to drop the with-Kinect model to $450, and I just don't think that the gaming division's well-liked enough for Microsoft to do that.

    It doesnt matter what the reasons are. The point was that one company had a big lead on the other in the beginning. Different reasons why that is this gen compared to last is moot unless it has a direct effect on the situation at the end of the generation which we pronably wont know for 7-10 years.

    Also, once the PS dropped in price the "battle" never went to Sonys side. They saw better sales but thats about it.
    Oh, it absolutely DOES matter. There's a difference in having a year's head start in the market vs. releasing a product with lesser hardware than the competition. You can say that the point was about the lead, but all that does is mean that you made a point without thinking about the variables in-play in each situation. Also, it definitely went to Sony's side after the price drop. The consoles ended up selling rather equally be the end of the generation. For that to happen after Microsoft had the lead you mentioned, it meant that Sony had to outsell Microsoft from that point forward.
    09-01-2014 12:39 PM
  12. jonnaver's Avatar
    And Xbox had a massive lead on PS the first few years of last gen as well. Big deal.
    Not nearly as much as this gen. On top of that, Xbox was out in more big markets before the ps4 was when the sales lead happened which makes it an even bigger whupping
    09-01-2014 04:11 PM
  13. TaliZorah's Avatar
    Not nearly as much as this gen. On top of that, Xbox was out in more big markets before the ps4 was when the sales lead happened which makes it an even bigger whupping
    Wrong. Xbox 360 at one point had a 10 million lead on the PS3. Wont be surprised if PS4 never even sees that big of a lead. I can tell you are a fanboy and not just a gamer. Have fun believing what you want. :)
    09-01-2014 07:47 PM
  14. jonnaver's Avatar
    Wrong. Xbox 360 at one point had a 10 million lead on the PS3. Wont be surprised if PS4 never even sees that big of a lead. I can tell you are a fanboy and not just a gamer. Have fun believing what you want. :)
    No need to be a baby about it, man up
    09-01-2014 09:40 PM
  15. rex.reyesiii's Avatar
    here's the most "balanced" comparison article I found on the Web so far imho

    The PS4 vs Xbox One – What Matters Now
    krox1105 likes this.
    09-02-2014 08:52 AM
  16. coip's Avatar
    here's the most "balanced" comparison article I found on the Web so far imho

    The PS4 vs Xbox One €“ What Matters Now
    The fact that anyone would consider that an unbiased article is exactly the problem. Case in point, the proclamation that the PS4 controller is vastly superior to the Xbox One because it has a headphone jack and rechargeable batteries. The first one is definitely a plus, but the latter one? How about mentioning that the PS4 controller's rechargeable batteries go dead every 6-8 hours and will likely be absolute rubbish in another year or two. In contrast, my Xbox One controller batteries easily last 4-5 weeks on average. There is a lot more bias in the article, but I don't have time to deconstruct them all here.
    MobileVortex likes this.
    09-02-2014 02:15 PM
  17. Keith Wallace's Avatar
    There's definitely bias in your battery assessment. The PS4's controller might die after 6-8 hours of heavy play, but then you basically quote an Xbox One controller's battery life based on occasional play. The Play & Charge certainly won't last 4-5 weeks of heavy play, no batteries do. My eneloop rechargeable batteries last a week AT MOST when used heavily.

    An opinion isn't bias. I didn't read the article, but just because the author has an opinion on the controller, it doesn't mean it makes the article unjustly biased, but that the author has a preference and expressed it.
    09-02-2014 02:56 PM
  18. MobileVortex's Avatar
    My rechargeable batteries last at least a month if not more. Both controllers work plugged in.
    09-02-2014 03:06 PM
  19. rex.reyesiii's Avatar
    The fact that anyone would consider that an unbiased article is exactly the problem. Case in point, the proclamation that the PS4 controller is vastly superior to the Xbox One because it has a headphone jack and rechargeable batteries. The first one is definitely a plus, but the latter one? How about mentioning that the PS4 controller's rechargeable batteries go dead every 6-8 hours and will likely be absolute rubbish in another year or two. In contrast, my Xbox One controller batteries easily last 4-5 weeks on average. There is a lot more bias in the article, but I don't have time to deconstruct them all here.
    The tone of the article is what I got me thinking it was unbiased specailly regarding the Res-Gate issue. :)
    09-03-2014 03:06 AM
  20. Coreldan's Avatar
    There's definitely bias in your battery assessment. The PS4's controller might die after 6-8 hours of heavy play, but then you basically quote an Xbox One controller's battery life based on occasional play. The Play & Charge certainly won't last 4-5 weeks of heavy play, no batteries do. My eneloop rechargeable batteries last a week AT MOST when used heavily.

    An opinion isn't bias. I didn't read the article, but just because the author has an opinion on the controller, it doesn't mean it makes the article unjustly biased, but that the author has a preference and expressed it.
    You're right in that "6-8h" vs "4-5 weeks" wasnt the fairest comparison, but even then it's not subjective at all, it's a fact that the Xbox One controller has way better battery life regardless of use. I recall the launch of the consoles, many reviewers were saying something like 30-40 hours they got out of the default batteries, many said they didnt manage to run them out in the time they had the console available for testing before writing the review.

    I can't understand why on earth did Sony make them 1) not user replaceable 2) way bigger. The battery life on it at the moment is quite pathetic and I would be really pissed off. It kills half of the point of a wireless controller when you have to put it on the charger after every session, let alone having to plug it in midsession (not a problem to all, but would be to me with a toddler in the house)
    09-03-2014 08:06 AM
  21. Crasstoe's Avatar
    I praise MS on that front - with a lifetime supply of free batteries I couldn't be happier being able to simply replace them when they wear out - after a month or 2 of course.

    I know I'm not the heaviest gamer out there but with both me AND the mrs playing on it at different times we are easily racking up 35 hours use a week, and that isn't including when the console is on for TV (the controllers aren't in use during that time thanks to SmartGlass and Kinect).

    Actually thinking about it that is how MS should advertise...
    "Kinect, save your controller for when you need it"
    09-03-2014 09:19 AM
  22. Keith Wallace's Avatar
    You're right in that "6-8h" vs "4-5 weeks" wasnt the fairest comparison, but even then it's not subjective at all, it's a fact that the Xbox One controller has way better battery life regardless of use. I recall the launch of the consoles, many reviewers were saying something like 30-40 hours they got out of the default batteries, many said they didnt manage to run them out in the time they had the console available for testing before writing the review.

    I can't understand why on earth did Sony make them 1) not user replaceable 2) way bigger. The battery life on it at the moment is quite pathetic and I would be really pissed off. It kills half of the point of a wireless controller when you have to put it on the charger after every session, let alone having to plug it in midsession (not a problem to all, but would be to me with a toddler in the house)
    I can't not agree on all of this. I assume Sony ran out of space or worried about heat (proximity of battery to sensitive parts) or something, as far as making the internal battery bigger is concerned. Still, I also think that they figured 6-8 hours to be within the time frame of most users' time spent on the console at a single time, meaning if people weren't too lazy to charge their batteries after every 1-2 uses, the life wouldn't be as much of a problem. Of course, not putting my batteries on the charger for a few weeks at a time (because I haven't played that heavily of late) is nice because I forget and am lazy (nor do I want to deal with taking the batteries out and putting them in and such). That's to say that I could live with 6-8 hours. I mean, from the official standpoint, having a rechargeable battery from MS makes their controllers $25 (for the Play & Charge) more than Sony's, so I can also forgive Sony for the battery life because they kept consumer costs down.

    All that said, I'm pleased with my eneloops (the one time I really put them to the test, they lasted 5 days or so), but I also didn't like spending the $21 for 4 AAs and a charger to get my controller going.
    09-03-2014 11:27 AM
  23. berty6294's Avatar
    I prefer this over Microsoft's solution. Super elegant, long battery life, and easy.

    http://www.bestbuy.com/site/insignia-dual-controller-charger-for-xbox-one/2352071.p;jsessionid=DE04EA3F8E97C282DD570687883635B4.bbolsp-app04-201?id=1219073326634&skuId=2352071&st=categoryid$pcmcat310600050019&cp=1&lp=3
    09-03-2014 11:34 AM
  24. coip's Avatar
    There's definitely bias in your battery assessment. The PS4's controller might die after 6-8 hours of heavy play, but then you basically quote an Xbox One controller's battery life based on occasional play. The Play & Charge certainly won't last 4-5 weeks of heavy play, no batteries do. My eneloop rechargeable batteries last a week AT MOST when used heavily.
    There isn't bias in my battery assessment. I was never claiming to have conducted a scientific experiment comparing battery life between the two devices. I reported that battery life on the Dual Shock 4 is unimpressive, citing the 6 to 8-hour mark that my PS4-owning friends have revealed, and compared it to my own experience with my Xbox One controller, which lasts 4-5 weeks on average. Others since then have reported similar battery life, and all of my Xbox One-owning friends have indicated the same (and, yes, as another pointed out, SmartGlass and Kinect voice and gesture commands greatly aid the battery life in Xbox controllers as quite often I never even have to turn on a controller, but that is a feature of the Xbox One that can also be factored into the battery life comparisons). Clearly scientific experiments would be preferable, but until that happens, nitpicking ignores the point: the Xbox One controller batteries last significantly longer than the PS4's do. Ergo, because the author of the "unbiased" article didn't mention this, that article is biased.

    An opinion isn't bias. I didn't read the article, but just because the author has an opinion on the controller, it doesn't mean it makes the article unjustly biased, but that the author has a preference and expressed it .
    An opinion isn't bias? Every opinion stems from bias. That said, the bias in the article, which you admitted to not reading yet still felt compelled to chime in on, lay not in the presentation of the author's opinion but in the omission of facts. He presented something only as a pro when it has both pros and cons. That's not the expression of a preference. That's bias by omission.
    09-03-2014 11:41 AM
  25. Keith Wallace's Avatar
    So much crap in this. I can't even bother with the first, because you're assessing two different use cases to defend battery life. You have to have a controlled environment for comparison. If your PS4 friends play 6-8 hours straight, while your Xbox friends are mostly on Netflix, it's not a 1:1 comparison. You'd need similar habits, and if you used that, you wouldn't get 4-5 weeks of battery life on a One controller.

    As for saying that an opinion is rooted in bias, that's dumb. An opinion can be completely fact-based, even if it's an anecdotal sample. For example, I have a hard time recommending Seagate HDDs over Western Digital because, in my personal experiences, WD drives have held up better. Is that a Western Digital bias? No, it's an observation. In my opinion, based on real-world experiences, Western Digital drives are better because they last longer. That's not a bias, that's an analysis.

    In my opinion, the PS4 has better gaming hardware, regardless of my BIAS towards the Xbox, due to game preferences (and other things). Actually, I guess that's not an opinion, that's a fact. Ignore that.
    09-03-2014 01:17 PM
505 ... 7891011 ...

Similar Threads

  1. Dead Rising 4 now available on Xbox One and Windows 10
    By WindowsCentral.com in forum Windows Central News Discussion
    Replies: 1
    Last Post: 12-06-2016, 09:27 AM
  2. Windows 7 vs Windows 8 vs Windows 10
    By antheocy in forum Ask a Question
    Replies: 2
    Last Post: 12-06-2016, 08:39 AM
  3. AMC app comes to Xbox One with full episodes of The Walking Dead and more
    By WindowsCentral.com in forum Windows Central News Discussion
    Replies: 0
    Last Post: 12-05-2016, 03:11 PM
  4. Astro A50 wireless Xbox One and PC headset (2016) review
    By WindowsCentral.com in forum Windows Central News Discussion
    Replies: 0
    Last Post: 12-05-2016, 02:00 PM
  5. New this week for Xbox One: Dead Rising 4, Gigantic
    By WindowsCentral.com in forum Windows Central News Discussion
    Replies: 0
    Last Post: 12-05-2016, 01:00 PM
LINK TO POST COPIED TO CLIPBOARD