Recommended Posts

Define why it wasn't a meaningful competitor to the PS2. Because the comment you quoted was a question and he says the PS2 has no competition cause it had better games, better content and third party support. Doesn't that make the console better?

no. hardware wise it was not a "better" console. Xbox clearly had superior specs+hardware than PS2. It had massive games library (third party support as you said). I wouldn't say "better" games or content because that is subjective but it clearly had much larger library compared to Xbox.

If you wanted more games with wider variety, you bought a PS2 - there was no competition.

So the US is the only country with a National Purchase Diary?

Best to know what your talking about before you post.

best to understand what you're reading before you post. the data released by NPD for consoles is US only. I don't see them tracking worldwide sales anywhere. And plus, NPD was wrong and way off many times compared to official Microsoft numbers. There were a few times that they released their sales data,and Microsoft came out and said they sold double that.

best to understand what you're reading before you post. the data released by NPD for consoles is US only. I don't see them tracking worldwide sales anywhere. And plus, NPD was wrong and way off many times compared to official Microsoft numbers. There were a few times that they released their sales data,and Microsoft came out and said they sold double that.

 

Ok so everyone's sales figures are wrong, except for this information where you state without giving a source that Microsoft has sold double what others suggested?

Ok so everyone's sales figures are wrong, except for this information where you state without giving a source that Microsoft has sold double what others suggested?

 

How about you get back on topic...you know the one that you started?

No one, other than you, gives a ###### about sales numbers.

:rolleyes:

Ok so everyone's sales figures are wrong, except for this information where you state without giving a source that Microsoft has sold double what others suggested?

Gotta say I lol'd.

 

Pretty sure the NPD's sales figures in the US are spot on. MS could of been referring to shipped rather than actual purchased. 

We have left the topic I suppose, either way a price drop will happen, that's the nature of things, it's just a matter of when.  IF, and because of the new TV features I think this could happen, MS announces deals with the cable companies to provide the XB1 as a set top box option subsidized to where it's also $399 or it could be even less, say, $299.  Then in that case I don't expect a price drop soon, maybe in holiday 2015 unless Sony starts to cut aggressively.  I doubt it though, I think $399 is cutting it low already to start out for them.

 

If there is no deal with cable companies for use as set top boxes then I still think we'll see a price cut a year from now, so holiday 2014.  I think it'll come soon not because of weak sales or so on but because the XB1 will also have a broader digital store, not just curated like on the 360.  Expect to see a number of apps, like with Windows Store and Windows Phone Store.   With a revshare model that adds to it on top of the licensing cuts they get from games etc I think they'll be able to make more money back quicker and thus cut the price sooner.

 

Heck, if everything works out then maybe both of the above happens and we see some very nice deals via your cable provider and also a quick $50 price cut 6 months after it hits retail.

Ok so everyone's sales figures are wrong, except for this information where you state without giving a source that Microsoft has sold double what others suggested?

 

you do realize that sales data by these analytical firms are estimates,not actual sales data? are you going to trust some firm in these other countries without question? they use various methods such as polling, channel checks,etc.. but this doesn't actual reveal real sales data. NPD U.S data for example for December 2012 was off by 100K from official Microsoft numbers. And this is why VGChartz numbers are always way off,and get updated when real sales figures are released. Ever see smartphone estimates,and when real numbers are revealed,alot of times there is a very large discrepancy?

The list you used as a source has 6 PlayStation games of which 4 were PS exclusives and 4 Xbox games which only 2 were exclusive.

 

 

I agree, both console makers are just after a profit it is why I don't believe in brand loyalty. If its a good product buy ii, if not don't buy it just cause your loyal to the company.

 

MS does have a bigger net worth than Sony and can afford to throw more money at it, its obvious in the fact that they signed a deal with the NFL for $400 Million to get live stats and media rights or the hundreds of millions of dollars spent in TV show productions and the billion in game development. But even then Sony has confirmed over 100 titles will be coming to the PS4 in the first year of release, which is more than what the Xbox currently has. It makes it look like Sony is tunneling most of its investments into gaming, while Microsoft are spreading it across the board.

 

 

So wait, if Sony has said that over 100 titles are coming to the ps4 in the first year, did they clarify if that means retail titles or if it includes psn titles as well? How many are going to be first and third party?

 

Also, has MS said the total number of games that will be out during the first year to compare. I've seen that 100 title figure before, but I haven't seen it said what will be on the X1.

 

Honestly, we really don't know the percentages of money being spent on gaming vs non-gaming features. Look at Sony for example. It seems like we are taking their PR statements as evidence of real facts. Do we know how much Sony is investing in media features and their Move system? To me, knowing that MS has deeper pockets makes me think they can get away with more investment in non gaming while still investing in gaming as Sony does.

 

Either way, we don't know the answers needed to really say definitively. Its all just speculation based on PR.

i found MS move toward 'TV' are unappealing , afterall I did move away from TV shows years ago.

So, if MS insist that xbox one price (or subscribing price) are includes the TV contents I would regard it as MS trying to shove unwanted services to my face.

MS should've at least offers lower prices that exclude all of those 'TV services'.

i found MS move toward 'TV' are unappealing , afterall I did move away from TV shows years ago.

So, if MS insist that xbox one price (or subscribing price) are includes the TV contents I would regard it as MS trying to shove unwanted services to my face.

MS should've at least offers lower prices that exclude all of those 'TV services'.

How is showing the *Bonus* features forcing something on you??? Do you have to use those features to game??? Xbox Live is still there better than ever... the games will be there better than ever... Once you go over $400-$500 for a box... It better do more than game for that kind of money... Unless your rich and money doesn't really matter to you... Your rant sounds like a bandwagon rant...

Those features aren't even forced on you... It's not like you have to use them to game...

Good, Sony aren't offering what MS are offering which supports the price difference. The Kinect is worth nearly the cost of the box on it's own.

 

Sony are just playing dirty this generation, they're taking cheap stabs at everything.

 

lol, let's not pretend that Microsoft plays any cleaner here. That would just be silly. :laugh:

 

Also, I seriously doubt the FPS issue can even be discussed properly when you're looking at different developers with unfinished games, on systems which are likely not even being tapped to their full potential to begin with...

 

How is showing the *Bonus* features forcing something on you??? Do you have to use those features to game??? Xbox Live is still there better than ever... the games will be there better than ever... Once you go over $400-$500 for a box... It better do more than game for that kind of money... Unless your rich and money doesn't really matter to you... Your rant sounds like a bandwagon rant...

Those features aren't even forced on you... It's not like you have to use them to game...

 

And your rants are quite honestly copy-paste at this point so I'm not sure I understand why you're being critical of him... :ermm:

 

---

 

As for Microsoft, I think they could have done more without the Kinect, but we'll have to see how things pan out for them. At this point, with the cost associated with the Kinect, I cannot see them cutting the price of their system at all.

 

As for myself, I don't care anymore since I'm getting an Xbone for free. I'll still get me a PS4, but at least I can give it a fair comparison without spending all that money.

lol, let's not pretend that Microsoft plays any cleaner here. That would just be silly. :laugh:

 

Also, I seriously doubt the FPS issue can even be discussed properly when you're looking at different developers with unfinished games, on systems which are likely not even being tapped to their full potential to begin with...

 

 

And your rants are quite honestly copy-paste at this point so I'm not sure I understand why you're being critical of him... :ermm:

 

---

 

As for Microsoft, I think they could have done more without the Kinect, but we'll have to see how things pan out for them. At this point, with the cost associated with the Kinect, I cannot see them cutting the price of their system at all.

 

As for myself, I don't care anymore since I'm getting an Xbone for free. I'll still get me a PS4, but at least I can give it a fair comparison without spending all that money.

If my words are viewed that way, then so be it... Read his rant back, to yourself

Read the rant back... Mark Whitten say that, if a game is made without Kinect being mandatory, don't use it...

If you don't like, tv,tv,tv..sports,sports,sports... You never have to see it... It's doesn't hinder the gaming experience whatsoever...

Kinect may feel forced down some people's throats...I guess if it's mandatory to have it connected to the XB1..then that is being forced on you (though I welcome Kinect). But their rant was based on *Bonus* content... Not a camera...

MS are no saints, or "clear winner".... But they realized that for $500 there better be more in that box than just video games for $500 or there would really upset people... Some say Kinect costed more to make than the box (not so sure about this one)..

MS may of bumbled words... Look like a deer in headlights... But they have a vision... ... Some things are better forced on you, good thing MS forced that broadband only jack on the back of the OG Xbox back in the day.. Or ya just might be seeing a 56K modem on the back of your console still...

Get a job that pays more than minimum wage, and $100 will cease to be an issue.

Funny how people were laughing at PS3 $599 price point and Ken Kutaragis "[PS3 is] for consumers to think to themselves 'I will work more hours to buy one'. We want people to feel that they want it, irrespective of anything else.", but now it's not really an issue because its Microsoft and people should just shut up and not be poor.

Split hairs all you want, when one does it they are the laughing stock of the industry, when the other does it who cares just get a better job.

 

How about you quite making excuses?

Also,your constant whining is no longer cute.

One thing to remember is the when.  That was back in 2006 when people were still used to $299 being the norm for a new console.  Back then, $599 was quite a bit for a glorified, at the time, Blu-ray player.    Flash ahead to 2013 and prices have went up, the market has changed, and the systems can do more than just play disc games.  Having a $400-$500 system now, that you know will be on the market for another 10 years or at least 7 before the next system comes, makes it easier to swallow. 

I thought at that time, the PS3 was one of the cheapest Blu-Ray players available (obviously there were more, but they were not very good if I recall)?  That is one of the reasons I got the PS3.  That is why the PS3 was more expensive, Blu-Ray players alone were very very expensive.  Yet people complained like crazy about the price.

599 is of course 200 more, not 100 more, and at the time the 360 had already been out for a year, and was even lower in price. 

 

wasn't the cheapest Xbox 360 for $299? so it was $300 more!!

 

(as a "fanboy" I am going to conveniently ignore the lack of memory card and wireless controllers for convenience. #dealwithit)

This topic is now closed to further replies.
  • Posts

    • Dude, im talking about simply disable it from settings app. Because of the eu regulation, you could disable it here for years.
    • One big question about Mars was answered thanks to Einstein's 100 year old theory by Sayan Sen Image via DepositPhotos Scientists at the U.S. National Institute of Standards and Technology (NIST) have calculated how time passes on Mars compared with Earth, adding detail to how timekeeping would need to work beyond Earth’s orbit. The study, published in The Astronomical Journal, found that clocks on Mars run an average of 477 microseconds, or millionths of a second, faster per day than clocks on Earth. A microsecond is one millionth of a second, a very small unit used in precise scientific timing systems such as atomic clocks, which measure time using consistent atomic behavior. This difference is not constant. Because Mars moves around the Sun in a non-circular path (an eccentric orbit, meaning its distance from the Sun changes over time instead of staying fixed) and is affected by gravity from other bodies, the daily difference can vary by as much as 226 microseconds over a Martian year. The study also identifies smaller repeating changes of about 40 microseconds per day linked to synodic cycles (repeating periods that describe how planets line up with each other as they orbit the Sun from different positions). These longer patterns affect how time differences slowly rise and fall. To make these estimates, researchers compared Mars with Earth and the Moon. The work looks at relativistic proper time (the time actually measured by a clock depending on its speed and the strength of gravity where it is located, as described in Einstein’s relativity). This shows that each world has its own slightly different “rate” of time. This becomes more important as space missions expand into cislunar space (the region between Earth and the Moon) and toward Mars. On Earth, time systems rely on atomic clocks and satellites, which stay closely synchronized for navigation and communication. The study is based on Albert Einstein’s theory of relativity, which shows that time is affected by gravity and motion. Stronger gravity makes clocks run slower, while weaker gravity makes them run faster. “The time is just right for the Moon and Mars,” said NIST physicist Bijunath Patla. “This is the closest we have been to realizing the science fiction vision of expanding across the solar system.” A day on Mars is about 40 minutes longer than on Earth, and a Martian year lasts 687 Earth days. But the main question is not just about days and years, but how fast time itself passes. An atomic clock placed on Mars would function normally, but compared with one on Earth, the two would slowly drift apart due to differences in gravity and motion. This requires careful calculation of what is similar to a time-zone difference across planets. Researchers modeled Mars using a reference surface and included gravitational effects from the Sun, Earth, the Moon, and other planets. This includes a multi-body gravitational system (often described as a three-body or four-body problem, where predicting motion becomes difficult because multiple large objects all pull on each other at the same time through gravity). Mars also follows a Keplerian orbit (an idealized elliptical orbit based on simple gravitational laws that assume smooth motion, before adding real-world disturbances from other bodies). In addition, the researchers accounted for solar tides (small changes in gravitational force caused by the Sun that slightly distort planetary motion and timing, especially in systems involving Earth and the Moon). These combined effects are described as relativistic proper-time offsets (small but measurable differences in elapsed time between locations caused by gravity and motion), which must be included when comparing clocks across planets. “But for Mars, that’s not the case. Its distance from the Sun and its eccentric orbit make the variations in time larger. A three-body problem is extremely complicated. Now we’re dealing with four: the Sun, Earth, the Moon and Mars,” Patla explained. “The heavy lifting was more challenging than I initially thought.” Although the differences are extremely small, they matter for navigation and communication systems that depend on precise timing. Even modern networks on Earth, such as mobile systems, rely on timing accuracy at very small fractions of a second. Communication between Earth and Mars currently takes about four to 24 minutes or more depending on planetary positions, meaning signals are not real-time. A shared and accurate time system could help future missions reduce confusion in navigation and data exchange. “If you get synchronization, it will be almost like real-time communication without any loss of information. You don’t have to wait to see what happens,” Patla said. Researchers note that fully developed interplanetary communication networks are still far in the future. However, understanding how time behaves across planets helps prepare for those systems. “It may be decades before the surface of Mars is covered by the tracks of wandering rovers, but it is useful now to study the issues involved in establishing navigation systems on other planets and moons,” said Neil Ashby. “Like current global navigation systems like GPS, these systems will depend on accurate clocks, and the effects on clock rates can be analyzed with the help of Einstein’s general theory of relativity.” Patla added that the results also help improve understanding of time itself under relativity. “It's good to know for the first time what is happening on Mars timewise. Nobody knew that before. It improves our knowledge of the theory itself, the theory of how clocks tick and relativity,” he said. Source: NIST, IOPscience This article was generated with some help from AI and reviewed by an editor. Under Section 107 of the Copyright Act 1976, this material is used for the purpose of news reporting. Fair use is a use permitted by copyright statute that might otherwise be infringing.
    • TeraCopy 4.0 Build 26 by Razvan Serea TeraCopy is a compact program designed to copy and move files at the maximum possible speed, also providing you with a lot of features. Copy files faster. TeraCopy uses dynamically adjusted buffers to reduce seek times. Asynchronous copy speeds up file transfer between two physical hard drives. Pause and resume transfers. Pause copy process at any time to free up system resources and continue with a single click. Error recovery. In case of copy error, TeraCopy will try several times and in the worse case just skips the file, not terminating the entire transfer. Interactive file list. TeraCopy shows failed file transfers and lets you fix the problem and recopy only problem files. Shell integration. TeraCopy can completely replace Explorer copy and move functions, allowing you work with files as usual. TeraCopy is free for non-commercial use only. For commercial use you need to buy a license. The paid version of the program includes the following features: Copy/move to your favorite folders. Save reports as HTML and CSV files. Select files with the same extension/folder. Remove the selected files from the copy queue. TeraCopy 4.0 Build 26 changelog: Added support for receiving files via the LocalSend protocol. Improved exception handling and automated bug report upload. Fixed several minor bugs and small memory leaks. Build 26 (June 24) Fixed a rare exception when a transfer completed. Features added since version 3.17: Enhanced speed graph. New multi-threaded copy engine. Support for copying to multiple targets. Queue system for managing multiple copy operations. Support for receiving files via the LocalSend protocol. TeraCopy entry in the modern Windows Explorer context menu. Integrated toolbar in the title bar. Why receive LocalSend transfers with TeraCopy? Handle file conflicts: Skip, overwrite, or rename files when a file with the same name already exists. LocalSend always creates another copy, which can waste time and disk space, especially when resuming an interrupted transfer. Filter unwanted files: Apply ignore lists or remove files manually before accepting a transfer, so unnecessary files are not downloaded. Better performance on fast networks: In tests over a 10 Gbps connection, TeraCopy received files several times faster than the standard LocalSend app on Windows. Download: TeraCopy 4.0 Build 26 | 14.5 MB (Freeware, paid upgrade available) View: TeraCopy Website | Screenshot Get alerted to all of our Software updates on Twitter at @NeowinSoftware
    • Briefly used Turbo Pascal (and Turbo C++) in 97 and soon after that I bought PC magazine that included a full version of Delphi 2. I still use Delphi today, some 29 years later.
    • Age of Empires Mobile comes to PC, here's how to carry over progress from your phone by Ivan Jenic Image: YouTube/Microsoft Microsoft just released Age of Empires Mobile for PC. The game, officially called Age of Empires Mobile: PC Edition, is available for free on Steam and Microsoft Store, almost two years after its initial release for handheld devices. Age of Empires is one of those franchises that entire generations grew up with. The original came out in 1997, and immediately got people hooked to building civilizations and crushing their enemies on the battlefield. However, the franchise today is a far cry from its roots, as Age of Empires Mobile is, well, a game optimized for handheld devices, and not a classic RTS title we’ve all loved for years. And, of course, it includes in-game purchases. The PC version is still a mobile game at its core, but it’s been optimized for desktop play. There’s mouse control, full keyboard compatibility, and a refined UI. Microsoft also refreshed the visuals with some 4k textures, so the game should look better on larger screens. The game supports Crossplay, so you can switch between your phone, tablet, and PC without losing anything. But linked progress doesn’t come out of the box, as you have to enable it first. Here’s how to link your progress: On your mobile device, open Age of Empires Mobile. Go to Settings (Gear icon) > Account. Select Bind Account and choose a sign-in option. Once you enable account binding, sign in on PC using the same method, and your progress will be accessible across all your devices. Xbox Game Pass subscribers also get a bonus reward pack on PC, which includes: 1 Monthly Pass Token 1 Custom Resource Chest 10 Universal 60-Minute Speed-Ups 1,000 Empire Coins Exclusive Player Portrait Frame You can find more info about Age of Empires Mobile: PC Edition, as well as download links, on the Age of Empires official website.
  • Recent Achievements

    • One Year In
      Philsl earned a badge
      One Year In
    • Dedicated
      Scoobystu earned a badge
      Dedicated
    • First Post
      Tom Schmidt earned a badge
      First Post
    • One Month Later
      D0nn13 earned a badge
      One Month Later
    • Rookie
      +ChiefOfNeo went up a rank
      Rookie
  • Popular Contributors

    1. 1
      +primortal
      458
    2. 2
      +Edouard
      177
    3. 3
      PsYcHoKiLLa
      124
    4. 4
      Michael Scrip
      79
    5. 5
      Xenon
      76
  • Tell a friend

    Love Neowin? Tell a friend!