well because that list doesn't have an OS on it... That's another $100 if not more gone
__________________
Thank you for everything CP. Good memories and thankful for everything that has been done to help me out. I will no longer take part on these boards. Take care, Go Flames Go.
well because that list doesn't have an OS on it... That's another $100 if not more gone
A 'cheap desktop' will often have 'cheap' complementary components that won't work well with a gaming grade video card, particularly the power supply unit... and aftermarket PSUs don't often fit OEM cases well. Some of the cases are also laid out in such a way that a gaming card won't even fit due to card length, or number of slots available. And because their boards are custom made, a lot of OEM motherboards are limited in the number of processors they'll support to prevent you from doing exactly this, so you might be out of luck there as well.
Best of all, you have absolutely no way of finding any of this out until you get all the parts home, put it together, and get nothing for your efforts.
__________________
-James
GO FLAMES GO.
The Following User Says Thank You to TorqueDog For This Useful Post:
I gotta say I find the entire next gen launch very underwhelming and I'm suprised the consoles are selling as well as they are right now. I keep looking for a reason to jump into a new console and I keep finding reasons to wait, and maybe wait for quite a while.
Its an outright embarrassment that neither machine is as good an all around media device as the PS3. Basic media functionality, 3D blu ray playback and things like that should've been ready to go from the start. Sony and MS want me to buy a new console but neither is as good as an 8 year old console that I already own. And MS has somehow positioned their machine as a powerful all in one media console -- but not as good as the PS3? Where's the value for the consumer here?
Secondly, almost every big name title coming this year is still set to come out for the previous generation consoles. How "next gen" can these games be if they are all still being put out on existing consoles? Sure they'll have better graphics, but I'm not sure I see the value in buying a whole new system for a visually enhanced game. I want new experiences that are incapable of being played on what I already own.
I guess my question to MS and Sony would be, why should I buy your new systems when my PS3 is better in every regard -- quality game library, full slate of media capabilities. At least with previous generation launches there were usually clear cut advantages to adopting the new technology (like SD to HD last gen). I get the itch to buy new technology, but as a consumer I need to see the value in it.
This pretty much nails it on the head for me as well. I have an Xb360 and would like to get an XB1 but at the moment my 360 seems to be the better machine (never been into playstation and i'm a creature of habit:-)) All right it doesn't have the Blu ray drive but i don't buy movies I tend to download them or stream them, which the XB1 cannot do at the moment, big step back for me. I also don't need to run my satellite TV through the XB1, why have two machines running, costing me more electricity, when I only need one??
As you said the problem with MS this time around is that they are telling people what they want rather than giving them what they want, big mistake in business.
Its an outright embarrassment that neither machine is as good an all around media device as the PS3. Basic media functionality, 3D blu ray playback and things like that should've been ready to go from the start. Sony and MS want me to buy a new console but neither is as good as an 8 year old console that I already own. And MS has somehow positioned their machine as a powerful all in one media console -- but not as good as the PS3? Where's the value for the consumer here?
Secondly, almost every big name title coming this year is still set to come out for the previous generation consoles. How "next gen" can these games be if they are all still being put out on existing consoles? Sure they'll have better graphics, but I'm not sure I see the value in buying a whole new system for a visually enhanced game. I want new experiences that are incapable of being played on what I already own.
Well in their defense, launching a new console is a very complicated process. The functionality that you see now on the previous gen consoles are a product of 6+ years of development. Neither 360 or PS3 launched with DLNA support baked in either and it took PS3 almost a year to get that baked in. By most accounts XB1 planned with loads more media features but was rushed out with limited language and half baked dev kits in order to compete with the surprise early PS4 launch. PS4 while having better developed dev kits sacrificed media support to meet the aggressive release cycle.
People said the same thing about "how next gen can it be" during the PS2 to PS3 launch with the game libraries. It's really a matter of addressable markets right now. Most devs will not want to create a new experience taking advantage of the new hardware, sacrificing the past gen market, until the new gen has a big enough addressable market size to make it profitable. So for now you'll continue getting multi gen multi plat games until there are enough consoles out there. There was a period of almost 2 years when triple A titles were being put out on the previous platform last gen as well. Though mind you the display tech isn't changing this time. PS2/XBox to PS3/X360 was a much bigger jump because of the whole HD/SD gap.
As you said the problem with MS this time around is that they are telling people what they want rather than giving them what they want, big mistake in business.
I agree with everything in your post until this, which I have seen mentioned a couple of times in this thread. What, exactly, are they telling people to do? If you don't want to run your cable through it, then don't plug it in. it's not like it doesn't work without it. Same with the voice crap. Don't use it if you don't like it.
How is giving people more options "telling people what they want"?
I agree with everything in your post until this, which I have seen mentioned a couple of times in this thread. What, exactly, are they telling people to do? If you don't want to run your cable through it, then don't plug it in. it's not like it doesn't work without it. Same with the voice crap. Don't use it if you don't like it.
How is giving people more options "telling people what they want"?
I think it's the always online DRM/game sharing policy, mandatory inclusion of Kinect and media features that he's referring to. No one wanted to the always online requirement on games they own (but this is forced on them by MSFT and quickly retracted after huge backlash) and many gamers didn't want the media features or Kinect but were forced to buy into them at a higher price point.
I think it's the always online DRM/game sharing policy, mandatory inclusion of Kinect and media features that he's referring to. No one wanted to the always online requirement on games they own (but this is forced on them by MSFT and quickly retracted after huge backlash) and many gamers didn't want the media features or Kinect but were forced to buy into them at a higher price point.
exactly what he was referring to and the ONLY reason microsoft retracted because PS4 wasn't restrictive and they would have been blown out of the water at launch (even more so)
Microsoft was basically booed off the stage at E3 when people found out about the price and their planned restrictions
So, they changed their stance on that issue, effectively giving people what they want instead of telling them. No?
Kinect is a valid example though. I would suggest that there is a fine line between telling the public what they want and trying to increase sales by providing more value for the dollar over the PS4. Kinect is worth $300 more than PS4 because it has this media stuff and kinect...but only costs $100 more. So far, it isn't working, obviously. Actually having those extra features actually work, for example, would help.
Well in their defense, launching a new console is a very complicated process. The functionality that you see now on the previous gen consoles are a product of 6+ years of development. Neither 360 or PS3 launched with DLNA support baked in either and it took PS3 almost a year to get that baked in. By most accounts XB1 planned with loads more media features but was rushed out with limited language and half baked dev kits in order to compete with the surprise early PS4 launch. PS4 while having better developed dev kits sacrificed media support to meet the aggressive release cycle.
People said the same thing about "how next gen can it be" during the PS2 to PS3 launch with the game libraries. It's really a matter of addressable markets right now. Most devs will not want to create a new experience taking advantage of the new hardware, sacrificing the past gen market, until the new gen has a big enough addressable market size to make it profitable. So for now you'll continue getting multi gen multi plat games until there are enough consoles out there. There was a period of almost 2 years when triple A titles were being put out on the previous platform last gen as well. Though mind you the display tech isn't changing this time. PS2/XBox to PS3/X360 was a much bigger jump because of the whole HD/SD gap.
Fair enough but if they spent the entire last generation getting those features into place, it shouldn't take another generation getting the same features into place again. I understand games take a while to really hit their stride...but mp3 playing? Video streaming? 3D Blu ray playback? Those are not new territory, they are a fundamantal feature set should be there from the outset. Consumers shouldn't feel like they're taking a step backwards by being an early adopter.
If the Iphone 6 launched and did less than the Iphone 5, people would laugh them off the stage at their reveal event. I think people that are paying hundreds of dollars to get a new system should expect a bit more from the product.
__________________
A few weeks after crashing head-first into the boards (denting his helmet and being unable to move for a little while) following a hit from behind by Bob Errey, the Calgary Flames player explains:
"I was like Christ, lying on my back, with my arms outstretched, crucified"
-- Frank Musil - Early January 1994
XB1 is worth $300 more than the PS4? Judging by the sales numbers I'll have to disagree with you.
I bet if they were the exact same price more people would take a chance on the XB1.
Yeah, that's exactly what I was trying to say....
I was speculating that Microsoft's reason for adding all of the extra features that Sony doesn't have was 2 fold: To justify the extra cost and to show more value for the money spent. The $300 figure was just as an example.
If the Iphone 6 launched and did less than the Iphone 5, people would laugh them off the stage at their reveal event. I think people that are paying hundreds of dollars to get a new system should expect a bit more from the product.
Yeah right, the fanboys will line up to buy the next new iPhone
__________________
Thank you for everything CP. Good memories and thankful for everything that has been done to help me out. I will no longer take part on these boards. Take care, Go Flames Go.
I gotta say I find the entire next gen launch very underwhelming and I'm suprised the consoles are selling as well as they are right now. I keep looking for a reason to jump into a new console and I keep finding reasons to wait, and maybe wait for quite a while.
Its an outright embarrassment that neither machine is as good an all around media device as the PS3. Basic media functionality, 3D blu ray playback and things like that should've been ready to go from the start. Sony and MS want me to buy a new console but neither is as good as an 8 year old console that I already own. And MS has somehow positioned their machine as a powerful all in one media console -- but not as good as the PS3? Where's the value for the consumer here?
Secondly, almost every big name title coming this year is still set to come out for the previous generation consoles. How "next gen" can these games be if they are all still being put out on existing consoles? Sure they'll have better graphics, but I'm not sure I see the value in buying a whole new system for a visually enhanced game. I want new experiences that are incapable of being played on what I already own.
I guess my question to MS and Sony would be, why should I buy your new systems when my PS3 is better in every regard -- quality game library, full slate of media capabilities. At least with previous generation launches there were usually clear cut advantages to adopting the new technology (like SD to HD last gen). I get the itch to buy new technology, but as a consumer I need to see the value in it.
There isn't a real reason to buy it your pretty much saying that you have the money to spend on something that is pretty much a half developed console that really wont be fully utilized till about two years in.My question is who Is dumb enough to pay double the amount of money for a game IE Tomb Raider that really only had graphics upgraded that's it.
