I mean, I don't necessarily disagree. The problem is consoles are closed platforms and ecosystems with their own proprietary OS'. If they were open and came with standard OS' like Windows or Linux, yet still had their own proprietary storefronts, achievements, friendslists, etc. it would make things a lot easier. And I do think this can be done without mass consolidation but in order to do it, they'd have to get rid of the idea of closed ecosystems which is what the Epic vs Apple lawsuit was all about. And I imagine platform holders would fight this very notion tooth and nail every step along the way the way Apple and Google are.
I don't think there was any denying just how good of a deal the Meta Quest 2 was and now how good of a deal the Meta Quest 3 is, especially for people that want VR and don't already have a VR capable PC or a Playstation console.
Already, the Meta Quest 2 was a completely stand alone device with its own platform that also allowed you to connect to your PC and use it as a PC VR headset. This already beats out all other VR headsets in the market on price outside of really cheap mobile VR headsets that you could pair with a $200 USD phone or possibly the Switch Labo VR (which only has 10 compatible games).
Meta Quest 3 will still lag behind the PSVR2 and modern PC headsets in terms of overall features and obviously graphical performance because it'll be using a mobile chip. A modern mobile chip that will likely compare to the APU in the PS4 but, a mobile chip none the less. That said, it'll be BC with Meta Quest 2 titles and still allow you to connect to your PC. So, it still has far more value over the PSVR2, despite PSVR2 being a much better value than people give it credit for. It's just a shame PSVR2 isn't BC with PSVR1 titles. I think if PSVR2 had BC and was compatible with PC VR titles, they would be pretty close in value.
Yes. I while I still play Activision Blizzard games, I play them elsewhere. I didn't play Activision Blizzard games on Playstation to began with. I never bought any Playstation system for either Activision IP or Blizzard IP. By in large, I play Blizzard games on PC. I've played some Activision IP on Playstation but that's very infrequently. I'm also not really into CoD.
It's inevitable that there will be exclusives, but Microsoft is already putting games on multiple systems already and plans to do so with quite a few of their upcoming games. As for this acquisition specifically, I think we can expect to see Overwatch and Call of Duty as multi platform releases the same way we see Minecraft on multiple systems. If anything, this will mean Overwatch and Call of Duty will be on even more platforms, not less. I'm thinking more support for Nintendo systems after this.
As for the rest of the IP, the likelyhood we'll see new entry's in other IP on other consoles is very low. Yes, Diablo does also have a history on Playstation and Nintendo systems, but I just don't see them bringing Diablo 4 to Playstation anymore, the same way Hellblade 2, Elder Scrolls 6, Wasteland 3, Outer Worlds 2, and other games are only on Xbox and PC.
On a side note, I think we may finally see World of Warcraft come to console. XSX is already setup for M&K support and there's mods in WoW floating around for controller support. If it does in fact go to console, I imagine it'll be Xbox exclusive. Not that this is in any way a good thing for Playstation, but for Playstation fans, there's already FFXIV. This would help WoW as it's been losing a lot of players and give Microsoft something big to compete with Sony on the MMO front.
I'm a Nintendo fan but I'm also a big fan of the Vita. I'll be getting a Switch, yes, but I'll still buy games on Vita as long as games are still coming out (that aren't on the Switch).
Yes, there are a lot of reasons as to why I think the Vita failed to take off but ultimately I think it's very similar reasons why the Wii U failed to take off. While they were both going for the same concept of merging both portable and console gaming, the tech at the time just wasn't there. While Wii U was a full console and can be played off the TV, Wii U wasn't fully portable. While Vita was a pretty powerful handheld and noticeably more powerful then the 3DS, Vita is still significantly weaker then PS3 and 360. Again, the tech of the time just wasn't there.
However, the expanding and highly competitive mobile market has rapidly pushed mobile tech forward since the Wii U and Vita. Extremely high end mobile chips made for gaming have been created that are much closer to console quality performance. The difference between Sony and Nintendo in this aspect, however, is that Sony looks to be stepping out of the portable market all together to focus on the success they're having with the console market where as Nintendo's success has been with handhelds for a while now. This means, they have a bit more freedom to go this route because their console market crashed and burned with Wii U and they definitely need new, modern hardware.
All of this said, I still need to see a lot more about Switch, particularly around the OS and the Online service. Also, while I think that the Switch will likely do really good, unless all the same games that release on Vita end up on the Switch, I don't envision Vita support or software sales to be going anywhere, though hardware sales will likely drop.
As a multi-console owner and a PC gamer, this generation has been pretty underwhelming so far (for the home consoles at least). PS4 and XB1 are taking forever to build up a library of games that I can only play on them, where as Nintendo's handling of the Wii U has been incredibly bad though I will say I do own one and enjoy the games very much.
For me, I've been waiting for the library of exclusive games, games that are hard to obtain elsewhere, and features I want to start building up on PS4 and XB1. XB1 got to that point by the end of 2015 for me, so I took advantage of deals and bought it. PS4 is currently not at the point where it's a buy for me but it'll definitely be next year sometime.
However, the fact it took PS4 and XB1 this long to really start taking off exclusive wise doesn't do a lot to help my confidence in their futures. Sure they do have some really good looking games coming out in 2016 and beyond but 2+ years to really get going is way longer then the norm. By the 2nd year, PS3 and 360 had quite a bit of really high quality exclusives on them. Even Vita and Wii U, with their abysmal sales, had much more in the way of exclusive games at the 2-year mark.
In the end I'll own every system this gen but currently, I'm not happy with how things are.
I think it's a crap statement but even if it's true, who cares? XB1 isn't doing anywhere near as good anywhere else and tbh it's good to see both systems doing good to keep competition stiff and so we get better games.
Comments 12
Re: Final Fantasy 16 Producer Reckons One Gaming Platform Would Be Better for Everyone
I mean, I don't necessarily disagree. The problem is consoles are closed platforms and ecosystems with their own proprietary OS'. If they were open and came with standard OS' like Windows or Linux, yet still had their own proprietary storefronts, achievements, friendslists, etc. it would make things a lot easier. And I do think this can be done without mass consolidation but in order to do it, they'd have to get rid of the idea of closed ecosystems which is what the Epic vs Apple lawsuit was all about. And I imagine platform holders would fight this very notion tooth and nail every step along the way the way Apple and Google are.
Re: Meta Quest 3 Revealed as Cheaper, All-In Rival to PS5's PSVR2
I don't think there was any denying just how good of a deal the Meta Quest 2 was and now how good of a deal the Meta Quest 3 is, especially for people that want VR and don't already have a VR capable PC or a Playstation console.
Already, the Meta Quest 2 was a completely stand alone device with its own platform that also allowed you to connect to your PC and use it as a PC VR headset. This already beats out all other VR headsets in the market on price outside of really cheap mobile VR headsets that you could pair with a $200 USD phone or possibly the Switch Labo VR (which only has 10 compatible games).
Meta Quest 3 will still lag behind the PSVR2 and modern PC headsets in terms of overall features and obviously graphical performance because it'll be using a mobile chip. A modern mobile chip that will likely compare to the APU in the PS4 but, a mobile chip none the less. That said, it'll be BC with Meta Quest 2 titles and still allow you to connect to your PC. So, it still has far more value over the PSVR2, despite PSVR2 being a much better value than people give it credit for. It's just a shame PSVR2 isn't BC with PSVR1 titles. I think if PSVR2 had BC and was compatible with PC VR titles, they would be pretty close in value.
Re: Poll: Would You Still Buy PlayStation Consoles Without Activision Blizzard Games?
Yes. I while I still play Activision Blizzard games, I play them elsewhere. I didn't play Activision Blizzard games on Playstation to began with. I never bought any Playstation system for either Activision IP or Blizzard IP. By in large, I play Blizzard games on PC. I've played some Activision IP on Playstation but that's very infrequently. I'm also not really into CoD.
Re: Will Call of Duty and Other Activision Blizzard Games Come to PS5, PS4?
It's inevitable that there will be exclusives, but Microsoft is already putting games on multiple systems already and plans to do so with quite a few of their upcoming games. As for this acquisition specifically, I think we can expect to see Overwatch and Call of Duty as multi platform releases the same way we see Minecraft on multiple systems. If anything, this will mean Overwatch and Call of Duty will be on even more platforms, not less. I'm thinking more support for Nintendo systems after this.
As for the rest of the IP, the likelyhood we'll see new entry's in other IP on other consoles is very low. Yes, Diablo does also have a history on Playstation and Nintendo systems, but I just don't see them bringing Diablo 4 to Playstation anymore, the same way Hellblade 2, Elder Scrolls 6, Wasteland 3, Outer Worlds 2, and other games are only on Xbox and PC.
On a side note, I think we may finally see World of Warcraft come to console. XSX is already setup for M&K support and there's mods in WoW floating around for controller support. If it does in fact go to console, I imagine it'll be Xbox exclusive. Not that this is in any way a good thing for Playstation, but for Playstation fans, there's already FFXIV. This would help WoW as it's been losing a lot of players and give Microsoft something big to compete with Sony on the MMO front.
Re: Reaction: Nintendo Switch Knocks the Final Nail in PS Vita's Coffin
I'm a Nintendo fan but I'm also a big fan of the Vita. I'll be getting a Switch, yes, but I'll still buy games on Vita as long as games are still coming out (that aren't on the Switch).
Yes, there are a lot of reasons as to why I think the Vita failed to take off but ultimately I think it's very similar reasons why the Wii U failed to take off. While they were both going for the same concept of merging both portable and console gaming, the tech at the time just wasn't there. While Wii U was a full console and can be played off the TV, Wii U wasn't fully portable. While Vita was a pretty powerful handheld and noticeably more powerful then the 3DS, Vita is still significantly weaker then PS3 and 360. Again, the tech of the time just wasn't there.
However, the expanding and highly competitive mobile market has rapidly pushed mobile tech forward since the Wii U and Vita. Extremely high end mobile chips made for gaming have been created that are much closer to console quality performance. The difference between Sony and Nintendo in this aspect, however, is that Sony looks to be stepping out of the portable market all together to focus on the success they're having with the console market where as Nintendo's success has been with handhelds for a while now. This means, they have a bit more freedom to go this route because their console market crashed and burned with Wii U and they definitely need new, modern hardware.
All of this said, I still need to see a lot more about Switch, particularly around the OS and the Online service. Also, while I think that the Switch will likely do really good, unless all the same games that release on Vita end up on the Switch, I don't envision Vita support or software sales to be going anywhere, though hardware sales will likely drop.
Re: Sony: PS4 Will Receive an Unprecedented Rush of Games in 2016
As a multi-console owner and a PC gamer, this generation has been pretty underwhelming so far (for the home consoles at least). PS4 and XB1 are taking forever to build up a library of games that I can only play on them, where as Nintendo's handling of the Wii U has been incredibly bad though I will say I do own one and enjoy the games very much.
For me, I've been waiting for the library of exclusive games, games that are hard to obtain elsewhere, and features I want to start building up on PS4 and XB1. XB1 got to that point by the end of 2015 for me, so I took advantage of deals and bought it. PS4 is currently not at the point where it's a buy for me but it'll definitely be next year sometime.
However, the fact it took PS4 and XB1 this long to really start taking off exclusive wise doesn't do a lot to help my confidence in their futures. Sure they do have some really good looking games coming out in 2016 and beyond but 2+ years to really get going is way longer then the norm. By the 2nd year, PS3 and 360 had quite a bit of really high quality exclusives on them. Even Vita and Wii U, with their abysmal sales, had much more in the way of exclusive games at the 2-year mark.
In the end I'll own every system this gen but currently, I'm not happy with how things are.
Re: Batman: Arkham Knight Aiming for Visual Parity on PS4 and Xbox One
Lame. It better look as good as the E3 demo.
Re: Pachter: PS4's American Winning Streak Ended in September
I think it's a crap statement but even if it's true, who cares? XB1 isn't doing anywhere near as good anywhere else and tbh it's good to see both systems doing good to keep competition stiff and so we get better games.
Re: Killzone: Mercenary Prepares for PlayStation TV with Patch
It's crazy how amazing this game looks. Hard to believe its handheld.
Re: Talking Point: What Are You Playing This Weekend? - Issue 39
Sacred 2 on 360
Heroes of Ruin on 3DS
Monster Hunter 3 Ultimate on WiiU
Resistance Burning Skies on Vita
Re: Final Fantasy X HD, FFXIII-2 Confirmed for PS Vita
@komicturtle92
Vita, PS3 will only be around for a year or 2 longer where Vita will have some life ahead of it.
Re: New Screenshots of Ragnarok Odyssey for PS Vita
@Rambo-Hamster
I agree, this game has great graphics and looks really fun but I hope there's a really good story to back it up.