Microsoft pushed back next Xbox reveal because it's not afraid of PS4?

There's been a lot of chatter on the Internet lately about the details for the next version of Microsoft's Xbox console. Officially, Microsoft still isn't talking, but new and unconfirmed rumors claim Microsoft is aiming for a first reveal of the hardware and games at a small event on May 21st, with a bigger reveal set for E3 2013 in June.

Previous rumors claimed that Microsoft was planning to reveal the next Xbox sometime in April, but now a new story from Bloomberg, via unnamed sources, claims that Microsoft decided to push back the next Xbox announcement until May because the company "saw little competitive pressure from Sony." That company surprised many in the game industry by officially revealing the PlayStation 4 console at an event in February, with a launch planned for the holiday period of 2013.

Which one is Microsoft and which one is Sony? You decide

The same Bloomberg story repeated previously reported rumors that the next Xbox would have a processor and graphics chip both provided by AMD, which is confirmed as providing that hardware for the PS4. It also mentioned that the console may not be backwards compatible with current Xbox 360 games because of the AMD hardware, which was also mentioned by Electronic Arts' chief financial officer Blake Jorgensen mentioned as a strong possibility in February.

Source: Bloomberg
Arm wrestling image via Shutterstock

Report a problem with article
Previous Story

White Verizon Nokia Lumia 928 render image leaks

Next Story

Intel's Thunderbolt tech update allows 20 Gbps throughput

99 Comments

Commenting is disabled on this article.

Yeah, in order for MS to win well anything, they must offer stronger graphics and hardware. This is doubtful at best, if they are wanting to release any time soon. They should actually just wait at this point, for cheaper chips that would be two or more generations faster than what is shown for PS4. The reason PS4 went ahead and announced first, is because one may look like it is copying the other in some aspects. Once Sony became set on a release time frame, they were only hurting themselves waiting. The cloud structure will eventually allow things to be cached and streamed from your own ISP via your own PS4, and this alone has great possibilities for additional content. MS saying Cloud anything now will be copying Sony, especially outside of the US. Always on, is simply a fail idea because of what this could eventually cause, even if it's not being used out of the box. The kinds of team based games that can be realized with the PS4 the way they have set things up, will be great.

Yeah and you can almost guarantee MS is going to do something with cloud. Seems like sony got wind of some things to me and decided it best to announce first so as to not seem like they are copying. Now at this point it really doesnt matter when MS announces. I will be buying both im sure.

Xbox 360 already does cloud storage...
Anything the new Xbox does in regards to Cloud would be more flushed out than what is currently offered...

So there technically wouldn't be any copying... just MS fully flushing out its cloud based plans...

Why are we arguing? Doesn't everyone here enjoy gaming? It's always good to have competition to try and push the specs up as high as financially viable.

Just get the console you like best and don't try to change other peoples minds, what they think doesn't really affect you, does it?

PC gaming, console gaming, what does it matter?! Just play the games you like and be happy!

Delays usually mean you're not ready, so it's more likely that MS is pushing back their announcement because they need to be more prepared.

Although I thought the original reveal was going to be at E3 anyway, it seems like if they're doing it in May, they're moving up the announcement, not delaying it.

> It also mentioned that the console may not be backwards compatible with current Xbox 360 games because of the AMD hardware

people forget.. xbox360 isn't backwards compatible either. Every xbox1 game you play on your xbox360 is recompiled to run on it. For that reason it's not impossible to see the same technique being used to make popular xbox360 games run on nextbox.

Honestly, a late May reveal with the ability to carry through the excitement into E3 was a great idea. If they leverage this right, it could help them tremendously...

How to spot a fanboy: They are convinced that the competition has to fail in order for the object of their affection to succeed.

I suspect both the PS4 and the next XBox will do fine in the market just as the current gen consoles have been doing. I have my doubts about Nintendo lately.... Which is sad. I really miss the days when the two biggest console competitors were Nintendo and Sega.

The best thing Nintendo can do going forward is do a Sega, and get their IP on every platform out there. The strength at this point is in their still exceptional IP and ability to make amazing games.

"built-in kinect that can read your lips" and "requires always-on internet connection" are two things that really, really scare me.

srbeen said,
"built-in kinect that can read your lips" and "requires always-on internet connection" are two things that really, really scare me.
No where does anyone confirm anything about requiring internet to do anything. Just that its always on if its plugged in.

Houtei said,
No where does anyone confirm anything about requiring internet to do anything. Just that its always on if its plugged in.

"Officially, Microsoft still isn't talking" So on that note nobody confirmed anything about MS even LAUNCHING another console. Should the rumor mill be true, and those statements be real, thats some scary **** right there.

I commend MS for keeping its Poker Face...

When there is no fear, there is usually no rush...

Sony's reveal of some of the PS4's features didn't even prompt MS to get antsy...

The rumors rather true or false... is giving MS free press.... and there's so much of it, that Xbox is on peoples minds more than Playstation is...

We need a distraction.... Ladies and Gentleman.... Mr. Conway Twitty
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9V1fX-FvKW8

ozzy76 said,
"Xbox is on peoples minds more than Playstation is..."
How do you know this?

That is sarcasm right... What do u see more in the press and forums... What the new Xbox has or doesn't have... Or PS4 news...

Correct me if I'm wrong, but many of the stories have been "no backwards compatibility, online to play games, built-in camera to watch as you undress in the living room, etc", there hasn't been anything confirmed from MS spec-wise for this console (all speculation). Many are thinking "ok, Sony showed me something about their next console, now it's MS' turn. OMGWTF! They want me to always be online to play Halo?" You may be right, it is on people's minds. Unfortunately for MS, possibly for all the wrong reasons.

ozzy76 said,
Correct me if I'm wrong, but many of the stories have been "no backwards compatibility, online to play games, built-in camera to watch as you undress in the living room, etc", there hasn't been anything confirmed from MS spec-wise for this console (all speculation). Many are thinking "ok, Sony showed me something about their next console, now it's MS' turn. OMGWTF! They want me to always be online to play Halo?" You may be right, it is on people's minds. Unfortunately for MS, possibly for all the wrong reasons.

Did u read my post... It says, Rather the rumors are true or false its giving MS free press...rather that press be good or bad...it's a ton of it...and it's free...

ozzy76 said,
Talk doesn't necessarily translate into sales.

What does my post have to do with sales...
I'm clearly stating that MS is getting more press based on rumors (negative press at that), than Sony has been getting based on facts they have shown, for next Gen consoles...
It seems to be getting under ur skin.... If it makes u feel any better I own 2 PS3's and 1 Xbox 360... And that's a true fact

A to of people started saying the next Xbox won't support backwards compatibility because it has a different processor architecture than its processor. But I think they're missing a little bit of info:
3) Next Xbox (rumored) = x86/x64 based processor (CISC)
2) Xbox360 = powerPC based processor (RISC)
1) Original Xbox = x86 processor (CISC)
Microsoft make the xbox360 backwards compatible with the original Xbox (with only a small download for each game) they were two different processor based systems but it worked. What could now stop them from doing the same going from powerPC to x86?
Maybe there really won't be any backwards compatibility but until they say so there's no reason for me to believe it won't be there.

its funny, no one even wants to talk about the PS4. Why should Microsoft reveal anything if all people are talking about is XBOX.

vcfan said,
its funny, no one even wants to talk about the PS4. Why should Microsoft reveal anything if all people are talking about is XBOX.

The only thing people are talking about is how the next xbox is doomed to fail....

Sonne said,

The only thing people are talking about is how the next xbox is doomed to fail....

the ps4 is so awesome and amazing that what everyone wants to talk about is a rumored feature the next xbox may or may not have. That is more interesting than the PS4. That tells you what kind of buzz the PS4 is getting,absolutely nothing.

vcfan - I'm curious, how well do you think Xbox will do when its 2 biggest advantages from this generation (lower price, and 12/18 month head start) won't be a factor this time around?

vcfan said,

the ps4 is so awesome and amazing that what everyone wants to talk about is a rumored feature the next xbox may or may not have. That is more interesting than the PS4. That tells you what kind of buzz the PS4 is getting,absolutely nothing.

So the entire internet is panning the next xbox and you see that as a positive...fanboys, lol

vcfan said,
the ps4 is so awesome and amazing that what everyone wants to talk about is a rumored feature the next xbox may or may not have. That is more interesting than the PS4. That tells you what kind of buzz the PS4 is getting,absolutely nothing.

I think Sony's just fine, not having to sit with people wondering whether they are the biggest douchebags in the world or not...

You preemptively strike if you are afraid Sony might knock it out of the park. You wait to announce later if you are not scared. Why worry after Sony has shown their cards or at least some of their cards. They are waiting to announce later in the year because it will be fresher on the consumers mind and the wait isn't along til release. What is so hard to comprehend?

Turbo still drudgjng up the past "rings" thing?

It's funny that's what I read from everywhere else I've seen the story before coming here. This whole Pro-MS spin that Bloomberg/Neowin put on it sounds like marketing cover to me but then again I have a PS3 and no Xbox so maybe that's just my own personal bias. I'd like to think I'm unbiased enough to give them both a fair shake (since they aren't backwards compatible anyway) but if one requires always-on and blocks used games and the other doesn't then I'm going with the one that doesn't. Hopefully neither do and it's not an issue.

MDboyz said,
... probably to fix the "Always On" connection ...

The always on connection that was never more than a rumour...?

TCLN Ryster said,

The always on connection that was never more than a rumour...?


Seeing as the console hasn't been officially announced yet EVERYTHING about it "was never more than a rumour".

The only reason Microsoft has to not talk about the next Xbox is because they are prob going back to the board and they must be scared of PS4 why wait then. I call BullS@@& another overheat box coming in 2013 with all new red rings I call it first.

Rather the new Xbox is a hit or not... You couldn't of been impressed with that PS4 announcement....

What Sony showed was not that was NOT impressive at all...

Showan said,
Rather the new Xbox is a hit or not... You couldn't of been impressed with that PS4 announcement....

What Sony showed was not that was NOT impressive at all...

Well, when you put it like that, of course not seeing as they didn't show anything at all. What they announced on the other hand was rather interesting. Spec-wise, the PS4 is a beast. If they can keep it at a decent price and just show up, they'll be a success no matter what.

Meanwhile, Microsoft will be fighting themselves really. This rumor of "always on" has put them in a rather bad situation. We can only hope that the worst of the public's fears are put to rest, but seeing as they don't want to acknowledge one way or another, it keeps people skeptical and weary.

And Nintendo... well, Nintendo is Nintendo and they too are fighting themselves just trying to market their new console as "not the Wii".

You can look at it any way you want, some could predict they're putting it back to make some last minute changes to compete with the PS4 reveal.

wasn't there a countdown to e3 2013 on major nelson's blog at the start of the year around new year's and then sony announced the ps4 afterwards?
seems like to me that ms is still on their own schedule to reveal it.

This article makes no sense at all, why would you push an event back if you did not feel the competition was a threat? If anything you'd push it back if the opposite was true.

Athernar said,
This article makes no sense at all, why would you push an event back if you did not feel the competition was a threat? If anything you'd push it back if the opposite was true.

Because you never punch down.

It means they feel that the PS4 announcement did not gain much traction and was not compelling. The ideas and games that were demonstrated for PS4 were not competitive with what the Xbox team is planning to announce.

It's like if Microsoft had seen Sony demonstrate PS Move would they have rushed to announce Project Natal? Why rush the announcement on something in response to such a lame product vision.

There will allways be fanboys of each sort, but this time i think the PS4 will have more supporters than Xbox (new) due to the fact that you have to be online to use it. And the price for the membership is expensive, since you get nothing but access to stores and also a lot of commercials.

As is probably the norm around sites like this, arguing over facts is no fun, arguing over rumors and speculation and ASSumptions, that's where the fun is.

Vegard Hagelien said,
There will allways be fanboys of each sort, but this time i think the PS4 will have more supporters than Xbox (new) due to the fact that you have to be online to use it. And the price for the membership is expensive, since you get nothing but access to stores and also a lot of commercials.

I disagree. According to a very trusted source I heard that the PS4 will require an optic fibre cable connection or it will charge you $100 per minute to use due to the amount of lag on the PSN.

ctrl_alt_delete said,
Due to the fact? What fact? Please stop taking rumors as if they're facts.

In norwegian news this was said like it was a fact, but yesterday they changed the news to say it was rumors. Will wait and see i guess

Why is Mitt Romney arm wrestling a chick?

Hardware won't determine the winner next gen, it will be solely on library of software and games that will separate them.
My main gripe against MS is how closed they are about Live and how much it limits what gamers can actually do with each other. Hell, most games could be Xplatform, just that MS said No due to lack of control.
Which ever one it is, next gen will be great for gamers.

shakey said,
Why is Mitt Romney arm wrestling a chick?
.

Not just any chic, that's Hillary Clinton. Duh, duh, duhhhhhhhhh (ohhhhh forshadowing lol)

Come on Microsoft don't be stupid. If Sony's PS3 showed anything its that fortunes can change quickly in this market. So far nothing we've heard about the NextBox makes it a very competitive console either. Same specs as the PS4, potentially just as if not more expensive and then we have the Always online rumors.

Microsoft should be afraid of Sony because right now internet chatter is very negative about Xbox. I know its based on rumors alone but that doesnt mean a negative vibe isnt building up.

MS should not be afraid of Sony. The PS4 conference was a dud. More of the same boring last gen games (Infamous, Killzone, LittlebigPlanet) nobody wants to play. The biggest announcement was that there's a share button on the ugly new controller to post videos of you playing on Facebook and a touchpad that will be very uncomfortable to use and serve no purpose. Is there anyone who wouldn't instantly block a Facebook friend that started spamming you with idiotic videos of themselves playing a game? Sony has no fresh ideas, this is why they are losing to Microsoft so badly and doing so poorly in the consumer electronics space today.

Avatar Roku said,
MS should not be afraid of Sony. The PS4 conference was a dud. More of the same boring last gen games (Infamous, Killzone, LittlebigPlanet) nobody wants to play. The biggest announcement was that there's a share button on the ugly new controller to post videos of you playing on Facebook and a touchpad that will be very uncomfortable to use and serve no purpose. Is there anyone who wouldn't instantly block a Facebook friend that started spamming you with idiotic videos of themselves playing a game? Sony has no fresh ideas, this is why they are losing to Microsoft so badly and doing so poorly in the consumer electronics space today.

Dude don't confuse your personal opinion as a fact. I for one cant wait for the PS4.
PSN+ and Gran Turismo is reason enough for me.

A game being played on real hardware in a live demo is pretty good for an announcement that early on, usually consoles are announced at E3 with videos of upcoming games and nothing playable. At this rate I'm betting Sony will have hardware in stores at E3.

It's hardware. I'm more inclined to enjoy whatever future features the current Xbox will contain. It doesn't matter to me what the next will hold at the moment, unless Halo 5 or whatever popular title I currently enjoy will come with such enhancements. Besides, I'd rather keep it thorough than rushed.

Astra.Xtreme said,
Out-of-date compared to what?

The computing power available. The PC and mobile segments continue to advance at a rapid rate, yet consoles plateaued years ago. The vast majority of TVs have been 1080p for half a decade now, we've seen 3D take-off and 4K is just around the corner, yet current-gen consoles are struggling to maintain 30fps at 720p.

Objectively consoles are dated, otherwise there wouldn't be any demand for next-gen consoles. Anybody who has experienced PC gaming would know that.

theyarecomingforyou said,

The computing power available. The PC and mobile segments continue to advance at a rapid rate, yet consoles plateaued years ago. The vast majority of TVs have been 1080p for half a decade now, we've seen 3D take-off and 4K is just around the corner, yet current-gen consoles are struggling to maintain 30fps at 720p.

Objectively consoles are dated, otherwise there wouldn't be any demand for next-gen consoles. Anybody who has experienced PC gaming would know that.

Please show us a PC that can perform at the same level as a console and only sets you back $200.

theyarecomingforyou said,

The computing power available. The PC and mobile segments continue to advance at a rapid rate, yet consoles plateaued years ago. The vast majority of TVs have been 1080p for half a decade now, we've seen 3D take-off and 4K is just around the corner, yet current-gen consoles are struggling to maintain 30fps at 720p.

Objectively consoles are dated, otherwise there wouldn't be any demand for next-gen consoles. Anybody who has experienced PC gaming would know that.

Monitors and TV's over 27" don't really do so well sometimes, when it comes to games. Let's not worry about the quality.

Astra.Xtreme said,
Please show us a PC that can perform at the same level as a console and only sets you back $200.

Well, a) that price point is subsidised, and b) you get what you pay for. It's like saying how can a Blu-ray player compete with a DVD player when it's so much more expensive.

The X360 is great if you can't afford any better.

theyarecomingforyou said,

Well, a) that price point is subsidised, and b) you get what you pay for. It's like saying how can a Blu-ray player compete with a DVD player when it's so much more expensive.

The X360 is great if you can't afford any better.

Well you really haven't backed up your point. Consoles aren't out-of-date because they play all the current games at reasonable quality. You can't say something is out-of-date because it's a few years old. That makes no sense. And of course you get what you pay for, but a console is much much cheaper than a PC with the same graphical capabilities. A PC is much different than a console anyways, so it also makes no sense to compare the two.

theyarecomingforyou said,

Well, a) that price point is subsidised, and b) you get what you pay for. It's like saying how can a Blu-ray player compete with a DVD player when it's so much more expensive.

The X360 is great if you can't afford any better.

I have an i5 Quad Core, Primary SSD and 16GB of RAM on Mac Mini with an amazing 27" LCD/LED monitor. Still wouldn't be a better gaming system than the 'out-dated' Xbox which has yet to reach its limit.

Astra.Xtreme said,
Well you really haven't backed up your point. Consoles aren't out-of-date because they play all the current games at reasonable quality.

That's because you consider 720p @30fps, no anti-aliasing, low texture quality, low polygon counts and long load times to be "reasonable quality". Whereas I game at 1600p @60fps, MSAA 8x / AFx16, high texture quality (often over 4x higher), hardware tessellation, hardware physics and short load times and therefore class consoles as low quality.

And of course it makes sense to compare the two, just like it makes sense to compare DVD to Blu-ray. At the end of the day it's the gaming that matters and PCs offer dramatically superior visuals and performance. All the arguments you make now could be made against the X720 and PS4 when they're released.

I don't dispute that consoles offer good value, though the mark-up on games makes it costly if you buy a lot of games. That's how consoles can be offered so cheap, because the hardware is sold below cost and is made up through software sales.

Actually no, it's like compering Netflix to Blu-Ray. Compering DVD to BD would be like compering 4000 GPU to 7000 GPU....

Consoles simplify things. No need to update drivers, tweak settings, making sure the game would work, upgrading hardware, installing updates for the OS, making sure you're virus free etc... All you need to do is to pop in a disc, and start gaming.
Just like streaming a movie from Netflix.

Will you get the same quality as PC ? Hell no, but for most people the simplicity of the consoles is making them the better option, just like a Blu-ray would give you a much better picture and sound quality than Netflix, but most people would choose the latter one.

theyarecomingforyou said,

That's because you consider 720p @30fps, no anti-aliasing, low texture quality, low polygon counts and long load times to be "reasonable quality". Whereas I game at 1600p @60fps, MSAA 8x / AFx16, high texture quality (often over 4x higher), hardware tessellation, hardware physics and short load times and therefore class consoles as low quality.

And of course it makes sense to compare the two, just like it makes sense to compare DVD to Blu-ray. At the end of the day it's the gaming that matters and PCs offer dramatically superior visuals and performance. All the arguments you make now could be made against the X720 and PS4 when they're released.

I don't dispute that consoles offer good value, though the mark-up on games makes it costly if you buy a lot of games. That's how consoles can be offered so cheap, because the hardware is sold below cost and is made up through software sales.

Good for you... And now you're switching your story. "Low quality" and "out-of-date" are two completely different things. For $200, you get a console that plays all the latest games, at HD quality, and doesn't lag. Perhaps you need to review the definition of "out-of-date". So you're saying that a PC with the highest end i7 and running on it's HD 4000 graphics is out-of-date? Lower quality != out-of-date.

Astra.Xtreme said,
Good for you... And now you're switching your story. "Low quality" and "out-of-date" are two completely different things.

I haven't changed my story at all. Consoles plateaued many years ago, at which point they became out-of-date. The visuals haven't improved, whilst PC gaming has continued to advance. In many respects consoles are like DVDs - they may be cheaper and offer better value but they're outdated and low quality.

theyarecomingforyou said,

I haven't changed my story at all. Consoles plateaued many years ago, at which point they became out-of-date. The visuals haven't improved, whilst PC gaming has continued to advance. In many respects consoles are like DVDs - they may be cheaper and offer better value but they're outdated and low quality.

Then you don't seem to understand the difference between low quality and out-of-date... A console will still play at higher quality than many PCs and even the newest integrated GPUs. So for that exact reason, consoles aren't out-of-date. This is based on the fact of the English definitions of the words...

And for the second or third time, a console is much different than a PC. Comparing them makes no sense. And saying a newest gen console is out-of-date makes even less sense since there is no replacement to the console. When PS4 and the Nextbox comes out, THEN the 360 and PS3 will be out-of-date.

Astra.Xtreme said,
And for the second or third time, a console is much different than a PC. Comparing them makes no sense. And saying a newest gen console is out-of-date makes even less sense since there is no replacement to the console. When PS4 and the Nextbox comes out, THEN the 360 and PS3 will be out-of-date.

But that's the point I was making - as soon as the X720 and PS4 come out everyone will accept the X360 and PS3 are out-of-date when that is already the case now. They haven't been improving for years and PC gaming offers a much better experience.

Astra.Xtreme said,

Please show us a PC that can perform at the same level as a console and only sets you back $200.

Everyone has a pc so why not put $200 to some use and get decent graphics card.

sat2012 said,
Everyone has a pc so why not put $200 to some use and get decent graphics card.

Exactly. Which consoles can run Office again? Which consoles can you use to plug in a scanner and transfer photos onto? Which consoles allow you to run video editing software? PCs do so much more than simply gaming. Most people here are posting from computers, so why not spend the money to make that system suitable for gaming?

You get what you pay for.

theyarecomingforyou said,

I haven't changed my story at all. Consoles plateaued many years ago, at which point they became out-of-date. The visuals haven't improved, whilst PC gaming has continued to advance. In many respects consoles are like DVDs - they may be cheaper and offer better value but they're outdated and low quality.

It seems you only care about the graphics... There still are things called exclusives, which are worth enough to purchase a console.

iNoPhone said,
It seems you only care about the graphics... There still are things called exclusives, which are worth enough to purchase a console.

All things being equal, everybody wants better graphics. Isn't that exactly what next-gen consoles are going to sell themselves on? Why buy music on cassette when you can buy it on DVD-Audio?

The Xbox 360 is designed around the DirectX 9 API. This API has been depreciated in favor of DirectX10+ (IE: there have been NO DirectX 9 non-security updates for years), it is 'out-of-date.'
The PowerPC architecture the Xbox 360 CPU is based upon has not been significantly altered since 2004. This is why the next generation of consoles will be based on x86, as it has effectively been deprecated, thus 'out-of-date.'
The Xbox GPU was superior to anything on the PC market for several months after release. The GPU chip class is no longer sold in a PC equivalent form, as it is 'out-of-date.'

theyarecomingforyou said,

The computing power available. The PC and mobile segments continue to advance at a rapid rate, yet consoles plateaued years ago. The vast majority of TVs have been 1080p for half a decade now, we've seen 3D take-off and 4K is just around the corner, yet current-gen consoles are struggling to maintain 30fps at 720p.

Objectively consoles are dated, otherwise there wouldn't be any demand for next-gen consoles. Anybody who has experienced PC gaming would know that.


You're new to console gaming I assume. Go look up the history of consoles, 7 years is the average life expectensy for a console before I gets upgraded. Both the 360 and the PS3 are around their 7 years mark and are hardly overdue. These consoles are made to last close to a decade (the PS3 will continue to be on sale for years to come)

Mr.XXIV said,

I have an i5 Quad Core, Primary SSD and 16GB of RAM on Mac Mini with an amazing 27" LCD/LED monitor. Still wouldn't be a better gaming system than the 'out-dated' Xbox which has yet to reach its limit.

That's because you bought an unreasonably priced machine that's not even made for gaming. I'm not against Apple or anything, but you can't be serious about having a decent gaming experience running OSX, a platform that doesn't have many games to begin with. Secondly, why on earth would you buy a machine without a graphics card, let alone the ability to even add one?

I get what you're trying to say here, but the Mac mini is a horrid idea for gaming. I say this as someone who puts together my own computers for roughly $400-500 each time. AMD Phenom II X4, 9800GT, 4GB DDR2... not a powerful machine by any means and my games still look better than the PS3/360.

I'm not trying to knock console gaming, but if you're going to try and put PC gaming down, at least be reasonable in understanding that you likely didn't buy with PC gaming in mind...

Lastly, for what it's worth, if you're going to be buying a new PC roughly every 4 years anyway, why not just drop $130-140ish like I do for the ability to play games? At the end of the day, I'm coming out to about the same price as a console anyway. The idea that PC gaming costs so much is outrageous.

dead.cell said,

That's because you bought an unreasonably priced machine that's not even made for gaming. I'm not against Apple or anything, but you can't be serious about having a decent gaming experience running OSX, a platform that doesn't have many games to begin with. Secondly, why on earth would you buy a machine without a graphics card, let alone the ability to even add one?

I get what you're trying to say here, but the Mac mini is a horrid idea for gaming. I say this as someone who puts together my own computers for roughly $400-500 each time. AMD Phenom II X4, 9800GT, 4GB DDR2... not a powerful machine by any means and my games still look better than the PS3/360.

I'm not trying to knock console gaming, but if you're going to try and put PC gaming down, at least be reasonable in understanding that you likely didn't buy with PC gaming in mind...

Lastly, for what it's worth, if you're going to be buying a new PC roughly every 4 years anyway, why not just drop $130-140ish like I do for the ability to play games? At the end of the day, I'm coming out to about the same price as a console anyway. The idea that PC gaming costs so much is outrageous.

Dude. My Mac Mini costs $600. I upgraded both to SSD and 16GB of RAM for $200 which would of costed me $600-$800 at apple if no crucial. Also, we're comparing to consoles with onboard, and the OUYA for example is no better either when it comes to optimal performance. Maybe I'm wrong. But this who graphics card topic is blown out of proportion.

Mr.XXIV said,
Dude. My Mac Mini costs $600. I upgraded both to SSD and 16GB of RAM for $200 which would of costed me $600-$800 at apple if no crucial. Also, we're comparing to consoles with onboard, and the OUYA for example is no better either when it comes to optimal performance. Maybe I'm wrong. But this who graphics card topic is blown out of proportion.

Then don't go through Apple for a gaming rig? Honestly, PC gaming can be done on a Mac, but it's going to cost you. Apple is not cost effective by any means. And it's kind of senseless too, unless you plan on running Windows on a dual boot or something, seeing as OSX doesn't have nearly the selection Windows does to begin with either.

No reasonable PC gamer would shell out that much money for that anyway...

dead.cell said,

Then don't go through Apple for a gaming rig? Honestly, PC gaming can be done on a Mac, but it's going to cost you. Apple is not cost effective by any means. And it's kind of senseless too, unless you plan on running Windows on a dual boot or something, seeing as OSX doesn't have nearly the selection Windows does to begin with either.

No reasonable PC gamer would shell out that much money for that anyway...

Good thing I'm not a PC gamer. I'm a developer.

Mr.XXIV said,

But this whole graphics card topic is blown out of proportion.

Yep pretty much. Comparing a console to a PC makes no sense at all. And saying consoles are out-of-date also makes no sense at all since there is nothing newer...

yeah but the reason the 360 and ps3 can still play current games is because consoles games sale better so the PC is getting drastically held back because no one wants to make a pc only game cause the money is in consoles. So yeah consoles are holding everyone back.

My favorite thing was first Sony said they wouldn't announce until Microsoft did, then got antsy and ran to do it first...

Truthfully I never got into Playstation, and everyone I know owns an xbox and looking forward to this as an upgrade.

there are many reasons why the xbox 360 did well, the main one being that the ps3 cost a fortune for countless years. If it didn't then it would have easily outsold the 360. That won't be a problem this time as they are using an AMD apu instead of 2 chips which the cell cost a bomb to manufacture and design. The leaked specs of the 360 is way worse than the ps4 specs too. If always-on is indeed true about the xbox then it will be destroyed by the ps4.

Also the fact that Xbox Live was much better than PSN. And also achievements which it took Sony years to try to copy. And also that Gears of War and Halo are much better shooters than Killzone and Resistance. And also Xbox Live Arcade and Geometry Wars. And also Project Natal was mind blowing compared to Move. And also SmartGlass control vs. PS Vita control. And... Well there were a lot of reasons. Microsoft had better ideas, not just better dev tools (but they had that too).

If Xbox is always-on then the features are so forward thinking that Sony will be caught off guard once again.

Dinggus said,
Truthfully I never got into Playstation

Must not have been gaming long, otherwise you missed out on some of the best games ever made the first two Playstation's sold over 100 million units a each

I had an XBOX 360 until early 2010 when I came across Uncharted 2 on a Slim PS3 and was blown away. Having used both consoles, I would anyday pick my Playstation over XBOX.

Microsoft took too long for a Slim Hardware redesign with wi-fi built in (and disappointingly without Blu Ray) while Sony managed to reduce the size of the PS3 twice; including a fan-less cooling design and no giant Power Brick.

2010 was the year of PS3 Exclusives (and probably the last year of exclusives on any console) and while the XBOX UI looked cooler, there was hardly any extra functionality that I found useful. In 2010, Facebook and Twitter were the selling points of the XBOX UI; both of which are no longer used. PS3 still is one of the best Media Players for ripped Videos (with the exception of mkv support).

Avatar Roku said,
Also the fact that Xbox Live was much better than PSN. And also achievements which it took Sony years to try to copy. And also that Gears of War and Halo are much better shooters than Killzone and Resistance. And also Xbox Live Arcade and Geometry Wars. And also Project Natal was mind blowing compared to Move. And also SmartGlass control vs. PS Vita control. And... Well there were a lot of reasons. Microsoft had better ideas, not just better dev tools (but they had that too).

If Xbox is always-on then the features are so forward thinking that Sony will be caught off guard once again.

This is all personal, I think PSN is far superior to XBL, it wasn't at first because Sony has neglected online play. I don't care for moving during gaming, don't really like Kinect, move or the Wii stuff.
But for 40 bucks I have a year worth of free games I can keep forever, I've gotten over 20 games already for both the PS3 and PSV. And some are great. For this measily amount a year I can play indefinitely online, tons of games worth 40-60bucks for free and after purchase continue to stay part of my library.. until PSN+ runs out or until I extend it ofc.

PSN+ alone is reason enough to favor Sony over Microsoft.


Xbox lacks Gran Turismo, major dealbreaker for me
PS the platform that made games like Tekken and GTA huge.

And ur seriously comparing smartglass with the Vita?
I can play games with my mates cross-platform between the PS3 and PSV, can u with ur 'fancy pants' smartglass?

Sony had views towards the console very different then Microsoft. Altho to favor people like you they are shifting to a more shallow stance.

And shooters on a console, yes if you lack skills and require autoaim to be successful in killing your opponents

Avatar Roku said,
If Xbox is always-on then the features are so forward thinking that Sony will be caught off guard once again.

And always-on requirement is so "forward-thinking" that it would result in Microsoft giving up 20-30% percentage of the market. Not every gamer has access to reliable, fast and uncapped broadband connection.

torrentthief said,
there are many reasons why the xbox 360 did well, the main one being that the ps3 cost a fortune for countless years. If it didn't then it would have easily outsold the 360. That won't be a problem this time as they are using an AMD apu instead of 2 chips which the cell cost a bomb to manufacture and design. The leaked specs of the 360 is way worse than the ps4 specs too. If always-on is indeed true about the xbox then it will be destroyed by the ps4.
Spes arent everything. Sega always had better specs vs Nointendo, yet Nintendo kicked their butts.

For example, while Sega was trying to push the 32X adapter to turn 16Bit games into 32bit ones, Nintendo ran 32Bit games right on the SNES without an adapter.

The games they made that did actually worked with the adapter were always fussy and grainy, while Nintendo games were very good looking.

I wish I could find a recording of the commercial.