People who think Xbox One won E3 due to games are extremely shortsighted.

First of all, which system had better exclusives shown is entirely subjective.  Microsoft had some good looking games for sure, but finding out things like Killer Instinct being developed by Double Helix, Titanfall being multiplatform, Halo 5 just being a CGI trailer, among other things, detracted from it a bit.  Sony could have had more exclusives shown, but games like Infamous: Second Son and Killzone: Shadows Fall look to be coming together nicely.

It's apples to oranges in terms of who had a better showing of exclusive titles at E3.

Here's the most important thing about it all, though, and why judging this E3 by games is shortsighted. 

People are claiming ownage because they think that Microsoft had a better exclusive game lineup.  When has the success of a system ever been predicated solely on its launch titles?  Are we determining whether PS3 or 360 has a better library based on the comparison of Perfect Dark Zero and Resistance: Fall of Man?  Of course not.  It's a given that both platforms will have games, thousands of them.  A year or two from now, no one will even remember the launch titles as more and more games start to pile into our living rooms. 

The fact that Xbox One uses online DRM, 24 hour check ins and has a strict used games policy while the PS4 does not is the real kicker here.  These are the foundations of both systems and are going to be the things we are going to be dealing with for the next 8 years.  These are the most important things.  Both systems will have an overabundance of games in the end.  The difference is, you'll be buying the games on PS4 and renting them on Xbox One.  You'll be forced to have an internet connection for Xbox One while you won't for PS4.  You'll be able to own your games, trade them, lend them to friends or collect them for the long haul on PS4 and you won't be able to do that with the Xbox One. 

The PS4, along with the Wii, has made itself eligible for collection purposes.  You will be able to own the PS4, own the games and play them 50 years from now.  As far as we know, the Xbox One is nothing more than a rental service where the games will become unplayable down the road, similar to a bunch of old PC games with no CD Keys. 

Knowing that 90% of console libraries are multiplatform games, why would you choose the platform that is designed to only let you rent as opposed to buy and for the same price?  Why would you choose the platform that forces you to be online and check in every 24 hours?  Why would you choose the system that doesn't allow you to lend games to friend or trade them as you please?  Why would you choose the system that relegates you to dealing with Gamestop rather than allowing you to sell your games on Ebay or Craigslist for a decent amount?  Why would you choose the system that renders your console and games unplayable when the generation ends?

I'm just shocked that people put more emphasis on a couple launch titles than these key points, the things that really matter.  In the next year or two, everyone here is going to forget about the launch titles for the Xbox One and PS4, but these DRM and used game policies on the Xbox One are things that will haunt you for the entire generation.

My god man, learn to be concise.  :P

I've clicked on at least a dozen of your threads over the years and never read a single one.

Lems/fanboys have to remember that Sony is still supporting the PS3 this year. 

I don't think anyone supports and hears their fanbase as much as Sony does. 

Lems/fanboys have to remember that Sony is still supporting the PS3 this year.

I don't think anyone supports and hears their fanbase as much as Sony does.

nitekids2004

You missed the part about the new 360 console and games coming out for it, I take it?

I dont think that there are many people - lemmings aside - who think that XboxJuan won E3.

Concerning their exlusives,nothing was that great.

PS4 won me over alone on the price. Wasnt really expecting it being so low. I confess I got p!ssed over the Pay2play online but having in mind I rarely, and I mean RARELY play online, a price of 399 euros is great for SP games. I know the Xbox still has some brainless zombies as fans but price is still a big factor when it comes to these type of decisions. I think the PS4 already won next gen

I agree with OP...Sony showed decent games besides we all know that more will follow.

The battle this time was in terms of what each console can offer hardware/specs/service wise, here PS4 simply crushed xbox. It's simply a better console and great games will come, that's the Sony way.

Besides when talking about libraries etc... people forget that xbox 360 started strong but half way through it life cycle MS simply abandoned it, I won't be surprised if they do the same and focus on TV entertainment more.

I think you've missed the point. Games are important but the longterm importance isn't to do with DRM or used games, the PS4 is cheaper and more powerful. MS's inclusion of kinect as standard means they will struggle to ever match the PS4's price. That is whats going to decide this gen.blue_hazy_basic

I don't like Kinect.  It's cool I guess for the people who are into that sort of thing, but it's not for me.  I find it troubling that the Xbox One costs $500 due to the inclusion of Kinect in every SKU, albeit being less powerful than the PS4.  What's even more troubling is the fact that almost none of the games shown at E3 even utilized the Kinect in any meaningful way. 

I haven't used the new Kinect so I can't comment on its accuracy, but the accuracy of the old Kinect was atrocious.  If the Kinect taught me anything, it's that its a crappy way to play games.  I was surprised the thing took off like it did, and I think it has something to do with the 10+ billion dollars M$ spent marketing and advertising the thing.  They created a buzz which surrounded it and made it a fad.  Judging by the overall responses from gamers all over the world, and seeing how it found a home in their closets after the intitial gimmicky fun wore off, I'd say that the success of the Kinect could be one of the biggest downfalls for Microsoft.  A controller that only proved useful in dance games has become their identity and has even driven them to taking it so seriously that they're willing to include it in every Xbox One SKU and even raise the price to $500 in order to include it. 

I'm just surprised that Microsoft is so out of touch with gamers.  They're like the guy that everyone makes fun of, yet the guy has no idea why they're making fun of him.  It's almost like they don't read the internet, or they're not even aware of the fact that people are unhappy with their decisions.  6 months ago, there was an outrage from rumors concerning the online DRM and used game policies, yet no changes were made.  Kinect has been the laughing stock of the internet for over a year and they include it as mandatory and implement it as a primary feature for every facet of their new system.  It's quite baffling just how out of touch they are.  It's almost like they don't have internet and haven't read any of the reactions to their decisions.  It's right there on their own Facebook page, but you wouldn't be able to tell if they've read any of it.  It's almost like they just don't care what people think, and I think that's a recipe for disaster.

hmm seems to me like cows were making a huge deal about E3 being solely about games, then MS for once actually went and showed more than Sony, now you guys are trying to backtrack and weasel your way out of actually giving MS some credit, and would rather try to make out games now aren't important to people who buy a console at launch when it's at its highest price, and the most important things now just so happen to be the things like no used games/always online restrictions (oh but not paying for online now...obviously, thats ok), mmm funny that isn't it?

Actually OP you are wrong. "The rumor was XBOX got no games!" for the last 2 years. So Microsoft having the best and most exclusives shown at E3 was significant and it did win the best games argument. (Which in Cow speak is who has the most, not best.)
Microsoft also has the better looking console and controller.

They just messed up everything else so bad the games no longer matter.
Forza 5 looks great.
Crimson Dragon is supposed to be Panzer Dragoon. IGN said it IS Panzer Dragoon under a different name, that is is awesome, and no longer Kinect.
IGN says Killer Instinctis better than the originals and the art style was chosen because they wanted to make the polygons look clay. Too bad they picked a horrible way to sell it.
Ryse could be good. It supposed to be fun to play. That is the important thing.
They have the game from the Deadly Prominition team, Quantum Break, Insomnics games, and The Black Tusk Game. All look good. All for hardcore gamers. Plus Dead Rising 3 is an exclusive and looks really really good.

Everyone here knows you are a Cow except for the 2 weeks you went Hermit. We all knew you were not gonna give Microsoft ANY credit and would hate it regardless, so why even bother making a thread when your opinion means nothing? It was set from the start. 

[QUOTE="blue_hazy_basic"]I think you've missed the point. Games are important but the longterm importance isn't to do with DRM or used games, the PS4 is cheaper and more powerful. MS's inclusion of kinect as standard means they will struggle to ever match the PS4's price. That is whats going to decide this gen.LJS9502_basic

True, but having in mind you can play the same games (and probably even better) on a console that costs $100 less will give the PS4 the advantage. Also we all know in the long term Sony's 1st party > MS 1st party

Ever heard the term: Preferences?

Actually OP you are wrong. "The rumor was XBOX got no games!" for the last 2 years. So Microsoft having the best and most exclusives shown at E3 was significant and it did win the best games argument. (Which in Cow speak is who has the most, not best.)
Microsoft also has the better looking console and controller.

They just messed up everything else so bad the games no longer matter.
Forza 5 looks great.
Crimson Dragon is supposed to be Panzer Dragoon. IGN said it IS Panzer Dragoon under a different name, that is is awesome, and no longer Kinect.
IGN says Killer Instinctis better than the originals and the art style was chosen because they wanted to make the polygons look clay. Too bad they picked a horrible way to sell it.
Ryse could be good. It supposed to be fun to play. That is the important thing.
They have the game from the Deadly Prominition team, Quantum Break, Insomnics games, and The Black Tusk Game. All look good. All for hardcore gamers. Plus Dead Rising 3 is an exclusive and looks really really good.

Everyone here knows you are a Cow except for the 2 weeks you went Hermit. We all knew you were not gonna give Microsoft ANY credit and would hate it regardless, so why even bother making a thread when your opinion means nothing? It was set from the start. 

timbers_WSU

If you think the X1 exclusives shown are enough for people to shell out $100 more, you're really out of touch. The x360 also started strong and see how it is now...

dont be such a blind fanboy

Wow, well worded and basically my thoughts, too. Good post.

Microsoft made up for a lot of their shittyness with a good showing of games at E3. Then they ruined that good will with a 499 price tag. And then Sony completely ran the f*ck away with it. That 3 minute stretch of Tretton shitting on Microsoft and the 399 price tag most likely decided this gen before it even got started. jg4xchamp

I agree. 

This was the highest degree of ownage I've ever seen before at E3. 

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=20l5KrQYVDk

To those people saying that this E3 was all about games, you're wrong.  What people wanted out of this E3 was for Sony to come clean and explain their stance on online DRM and used game policies.  Every lemming under the sun was saying that Sony was going to pull the same stuff that Microsoft is, they were just too afraid to admit it or didn't want to say it publicly because they were afraid of backlash.  That's why this moment is the greatest moment in E3 history, because it put the Xbox One in the spotlight as being the most anti-consumer console ever made by a long shot.  It shows that Microsoft simply doesn't give a rats ass about their fans or the people who buy their products.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=w6eOa812mYA

[QUOTE="timbers_WSU"]

Actually OP you are wrong. "The rumor was XBOX got no games!" for the last 2 years. So Microsoft having the best and most exclusives shown at E3 was significant and it did win the best games argument. (Which in Cow speak is who has the most, not best.)
Microsoft also has the better looking console and controller.

They just messed up everything else so bad the games no longer matter.
Forza 5 looks great.
Crimson Dragon is supposed to be Panzer Dragoon. IGN said it IS Panzer Dragoon under a different name, that is is awesome, and no longer Kinect.
IGN says Killer Instinctis better than the originals and the art style was chosen because they wanted to make the polygons look clay. Too bad they picked a horrible way to sell it.
Ryse could be good. It supposed to be fun to play. That is the important thing.
They have the game from the Deadly Prominition team, Quantum Break, Insomnics games, and The Black Tusk Game. All look good. All for hardcore gamers. Plus Dead Rising 3 is an exclusive and looks really really good.

Everyone here knows you are a Cow except for the 2 weeks you went Hermit. We all knew you were not gonna give Microsoft ANY credit and would hate it regardless, so why even bother making a thread when your opinion means nothing? It was set from the start. 

Vatusus

If you think the X1 exclusives shown are enough for people to shell out $100 more, you're really out of touch. The x360 also started strong and see how it is now...

dont be such a blind fanboy

Ouch..that looked like it hurt :)

lol

My god man, learn to be concise.  :P

I've clicked on at least a dozen of your threads over the years and never read a single one.

Wiimotefan

To those people saying that this E3 was all about games, you're wrong.  

arkephonic

Translation: "Sony didn't beat MS in games, so lets try to pretend thats not important anymore....along with having to pay for online."

No DRM and no always online are now the most important things EVER

I'm just surprised that Microsoft is so out of touch with gamers.  They're like the guy that everyone makes fun of, yet the guy has no idea why they're making fun of him.  It's almost like they don't read the internet, or they're not even aware of the fact that people are unhappy with their decisions.  6 months ago, there was an outrage from rumors concerning the online DRM and used game policies, yet no changes were made.  Kinect has been the laughing stock of the internet for over a year and they include it as mandatory and implement it as a primary feature for every facet of their new system.  It's quite baffling just how out of touch they are.  It's almost like they don't have internet and haven't read any of the reactions to their decisions.  It's right there on their own Facebook page, but you wouldn't be able to tell if they've read any of it.  It's almost like they just don't care what people think, and I think that's a recipe for disaster.arkephonic

No DRM and no always online are now the most important things EVER

marklarmer

Yes, they are

All I know is Sony seems to be learning from there past mistakes - getting along with 3rd party publishers, creating excellent 1st party games, continuing to support all 3 of there platforms and user base no matter how high or low, fighting against DRM and used game policies, supporting the indie developers and self publishing, supporting and reaching out to MMO games, pricing there console at a reasonable and afforable price point for all gamers, removing the peripherals gamers aren't interested in during there E3 conference; such as, PS Move, 3D... you can go on and on.

There just doing everything right as of now and as a gamer it speaks volumes and actually has me excited for next gen.

[QUOTE="arkephonic"]

To those people saying that this E3 was all about games, you're wrong.  

marklarmer

Translation: "Sony didn't beat MS in games, so lets try to pretend thats not important anymore....along with having to pay for online."

No DRM and no always online are now the most important things EVER

I know you have a predetermined agenda, so I'll take your comments with a grain of salt, but as I already outlined, the success of systems isn't based on launch titles.  Consoles have 8+ year life spans now.  The 360 released in 2005 and it's 2013 now.  Plus, it's not like Microsoft had a significantly better showing of games than Sony did.  Both companies had a few exclusives and mostly multiplats to show.  Like I said, everyone is going to forget about the launch titles a year or 2 from now.  What they won't forget about is the online DRM and used game policies that they will be dealing with for the next 8+ years. 

[QUOTE="nitekids2004"]

Lems/fanboys have to remember that Sony is still supporting the PS3 this year.

I don't think anyone supports and hears their fanbase as much as Sony does.

StormyJoe

You missed the part about the new 360 console and games coming out for it, I take it?

[QUOTE="marklarmer"]

No DRM and no always online are now the most important things EVER

Vatusus

Yes, they are

[QUOTE="LJS9502_basic"][QUOTE="blue_hazy_basic"]I think you've missed the point. Games are important but the longterm importance isn't to do with DRM or used games, the PS4 is cheaper and more powerful. MS's inclusion of kinect as standard means they will struggle to ever match the PS4's price. That is whats going to decide this gen.MFDOOM1983

thats very far from being true.

1. Exclusive is a convincing selling point for consoles.

2. Multiplat quality is unequal

[QUOTE="marklarmer"]

[QUOTE="arkephonic"]

To those people saying that this E3 was all about games, you're wrong.  

arkephonic

Translation: "Sony didn't beat MS in games, so lets try to pretend thats not important anymore....along with having to pay for online."

No DRM and no always online are now the most important things EVER

I know you have a predetermined agenda, so I'll take your comments with a grain of salt, but as I already outlined, the success of systems isn't based on launch titles.  Consoles have 8+ year life spans now.  The 360 released in 2005 and it's 2013 now.  Plus, it's not like Microsoft had a significantly better showing of games than Sony did.  Both companies had a few exclusives and mostly multiplats to show.  Like I said, everyone is going to forget about the launch titles a year or 2 from now.  What they won't forget about is the online DRM and used game policies that they will be dealing with for the next 8+ years. 

lol at "predetermined agenda", yeah i'm just laughing at cows who have been ranting about the 360/One having no games and MS focusing on TV/DLC/multiplats in their conferences, when Sony's E3 was just ALL of those things, with charging for online seemingly added in, half like they hoped people wouldn't notice :lol:

The reason people are reacting to what they see at E3 and being "shortsighted", is because they really have no idea what will happen over the next generation, if you don't like it, tough sh!t, maybe Sony should of had a better showing, your crystal ballin' doesn't really prove anything as all we know is what was shown.

hmm seems to me like cows were making a huge deal about E3 being solely about games, then MS for once actually went and showed more than Sony, now you guys are trying to backtrack and weasel your way out of actually giving MS some credit, and would rather try to make out games now aren't important to people who buy a console at launch when it's at its highest price, and the most important things now just so happen to be the things like no used games/always online restrictions (oh but not paying for online now...obviously, thats ok), mmm funny that isn't it?

marklarmer

Most importantly, MS failed miserably at addressing the elephant in the room: what is their official DRM policy? If this isn't true, then why not speak the truth to eliminate the negativity?

Be reminded that it's not about used games, but setting a new precidence in the realm of business and consumer rights. MS is against ownership (they are rumored to eliminate sale of MS office and will go to renting it annually instead). The fact that you overlook these issues is very sad.

[QUOTE="arkephonic"]

[QUOTE="marklarmer"]

Translation: "Sony didn't beat MS in games, so lets try to pretend thats not important anymore....along with having to pay for online."

No DRM and no always online are now the most important things EVER

marklarmer

I know you have a predetermined agenda, so I'll take your comments with a grain of salt, but as I already outlined, the success of systems isn't based on launch titles.  Consoles have 8+ year life spans now.  The 360 released in 2005 and it's 2013 now.  Plus, it's not like Microsoft had a significantly better showing of games than Sony did.  Both companies had a few exclusives and mostly multiplats to show.  Like I said, everyone is going to forget about the launch titles a year or 2 from now.  What they won't forget about is the online DRM and used game policies that they will be dealing with for the next 8+ years. 

lol at "predetermined agenda", yeah i'm just laughing at cows who have been ranting about the 360/One having no games and MS focusing on TV/DLC/multiplats in their conferences, when Sony's E3 was just ALL of those things, with charging for online seemingly added in, half like they hoped people wouldn't notice :lol:

The reason people are reacting to what they see at E3 and being "shortsighted", is because they really have no idea what will happen over the next generation, if you don't like it, tough sh!t, maybe Sony should of had a better showing, your crystal ballin' doesn't really prove anything as all we know is what was shown.

[QUOTE="arkephonic"]

[QUOTE="marklarmer"]

Translation: "Sony didn't beat MS in games, so lets try to pretend thats not important anymore....along with having to pay for online."

No DRM and no always online are now the most important things EVER

marklarmer

I know you have a predetermined agenda, so I'll take your comments with a grain of salt, but as I already outlined, the success of systems isn't based on launch titles.  Consoles have 8+ year life spans now.  The 360 released in 2005 and it's 2013 now.  Plus, it's not like Microsoft had a significantly better showing of games than Sony did.  Both companies had a few exclusives and mostly multiplats to show.  Like I said, everyone is going to forget about the launch titles a year or 2 from now.  What they won't forget about is the online DRM and used game policies that they will be dealing with for the next 8+ years. 

lol at "predetermined agenda", yeah i'm just laughing at cows who have been ranting about the 360/One having no games and MS focusing on TV/DLC/multiplats in their conferences, when Sony's E3 was just ALL of those things, with charging for online seemingly added in, half like they hoped people wouldn't notice :lol:

The reason people are reacting to what they see at E3 and being "shortsighted", is because they really have no idea what will happen over the next generation, if you don't like it, tough sh!t, maybe Sony should of had a better showing, your crystal ballin' doesn't really prove anything as all we know is what was shown.

How do people not know what will happen over the next generation?  Xbox One will have online DRM, 24 hour check ins and used game policies preventing you from lending, trading, playing and selling used games at your own discretion.  PS4 doesn't have those issues.  That is concrete, set in stone and is hands down the biggest deal of E3.  No amount of games can touch that with a 10 foot pole.

Personally this is what I think about the games scenario.

Microsoft basically played their entire hand. Sure, I'd say their exlcusive lineup in conference was bigger (debately better or worse), but it seem like a desperation move to trya dn get gamers back on their side. Sony, on the other hand, was able to get gamers on their side using no DRM or online nannuy services, plus games like Kingdom Hearts 3. Remember the talk of all the first party studios making PS4 games? Well, we STILL don't know what most of them are doing. That means there Sony played the game without showing their hand yet. I can only imagine how barren of announcements next year's E3 will be for Microsoft in comaprison to Sony.

[QUOTE="nitekids2004"]

Lems/fanboys have to remember that Sony is still supporting the PS3 this year.

I don't think anyone supports and hears their fanbase as much as Sony does.

StormyJoe

You missed the part about the new 360 console and games coming out for it, I take it?

[QUOTE="arkephonic"]

To those people saying that this E3 was all about games, you're wrong.  

marklarmer

Translation: "Sony didn't beat MS in games, so lets try to pretend thats not important anymore....along with having to pay for online."

No DRM and no always online are now the most important things EVER

You're right. Despite all the exclusives, PS3 still ended up last. I guess I just had high expectations of the Sony conference due to all the cow hype lol

Then the conference happens, and we only get ONE new exclusive!? I know console exclusives don't matter around here, but TitanFall is a big coup for the Xbox, and its the main reason I'm seriously considering it.

You're right. Despite all the exclusives, PS3 still ended up last. I guess I just had high expectations of the Sony conference due to all the cow hype lol

Then the conference happens, and we only get ONE new exclusive!? I know console exclusives don't matter around here, but TitanFall is a big coup for the Xbox, and its the main reason I'm seriously considering it.

RR360DD

[QUOTE="RR360DD"]

You're right. Despite all the exclusives, PS3 still ended up last. I guess I just had high expectations of the Sony conference due to all the cow hype lol

Then the conference happens, and we only get ONE new exclusive!? I know console exclusives don't matter around here, but TitanFall is a big coup for the Xbox, and its the main reason I'm seriously considering it.

Suppaman100

Did I say it was exclusive? Its not on PS4, thats a big deal as these two are in direct comparison.

No DRM - thats awesome

No 24 hour check in - also awesome

PS+ - Yeah, cows now have to pay for online multiplayer - Not awesome for cows, they've laughed at lems for paying for years now

Indie support - all of which is multiplat, plus Xbox will have indie

First of all, which system had better exclusives shown is entirely subjective.  Microsoft had some good looking games for sure, but finding out things like Killer Instinct being developed by Double Helix, Titanfall being multiplatform, Halo 5 just being a CGI trailer, among other things, detracted from it a bit.  Sony could have had more exclusives shown, but games like Infamous: Second Son and Killzone: Shadows Fall look to be coming together nicely.

It's apples to oranges in terms of who had a better showing of exclusive titles at E3.

Here's the most important thing about it all, though, and why judging this E3 by games is shortsighted. 

People are claiming ownage because they think that Microsoft had a better exclusive game lineup.  When has the success of a system ever been predicated solely on its launch titles?  Are we determining whether PS3 or 360 has a better library based on the comparison of Perfect Dark Zero and Resistance: Fall of Man?  Of course not.  It's a given that both platforms will have games, thousands of them.  A year or two from now, no one will even remember the launch titles as more and more games start to pile into our living rooms. 

The fact that Xbox One uses online DRM, 24 hour check ins and has a strict used games policy while the PS4 does not is the real kicker here.  These are the foundations of both systems and are going to be the things we are going to be dealing with for the next 8 years.  These are the most important things.  Both systems will have an overabundance of games in the end.  The difference is, you'll be buying the games on PS4 and renting them on Xbox One.  You'll be forced to have an internet connection for Xbox One while you won't for PS4.  You'll be able to own your games, trade them, lend them to friends or collect them for the long haul on PS4 and you won't be able to do that with the Xbox One. 

The PS4, along with the Wii, has made itself eligible for collection purposes.  You will be able to own the PS4, own the games and play them 50 years from now.  As far as we know, the Xbox One is nothing more than a rental service where the games will become unplayable down the road, similar to a bunch of old PC games with no CD Keys. 

Knowing that 90% of console libraries are multiplatform games, why would you choose the platform that is designed to only let you rent as opposed to buy and for the same price?  Why would you choose the platform that forces you to be online and check in every 24 hours?  Why would you choose the system that doesn't allow you to lend games to friend or trade them as you please?  Why would you choose the system that relegates you to dealing with Gamestop rather than allowing you to sell your games on Ebay or Craigslist for a decent amount?  Why would you choose the system that renders your console and games unplayable when the generation ends?

I'm just shocked that people put more emphasis on a couple launch titles than these key points, the things that really matter.  In the next year or two, everyone here is going to forget about the launch titles for the Xbox One and PS4, but these DRM and used game policies on the Xbox One are things that will haunt you for the entire generation.

arkephonic