There's a reason why I'm still a console peasant. PLUG and PLAY. A ps3 from 2006/07 can still play a game from 2013. And tweaking my pc just to get a game to run is not my idea of fun.
This coming from an iphone/dumbed down phone hater. (by the way, my friend's iphone 4 has a hard time playing some games released this year. Cheers.)
LOL peasant
Yes, console historically have a longer life.. I'm not sure about this new gen being PC based tho?
Mobile technology does change faster, I'm guessing because everybody goes on a 2 year contract, which sounds about right.
But can you play your PS3 games on a PS4? No.
If your friend upgrades to iphone 5, then all their games are still playable?
PS4 isn't free online
Android does already have free online multiplayer support, ie NOVA 3
On a TV the gaming experience ranges like this:
Xbox 1 > PS4 > PS3 > Xbox 360 > SteamOS / PC Gaming > iOS > Android / PS Vita TV.
I think XB1 is powerful enough to be relative to the PS4 but offers better titles at the moment, a better online experience, and some extra features.
The PS3 has better graphics in some games, more features and free online connectivity.
The PC has better graphics, free online and offers titles at cheaper prices. However, it requires long installation times, setting up proper settings, much less games, no valuable exclusives, no collective online experience, and server support usually gets pulled before the console versions.
The Steam piggybacks the PC Gaming but tries to offer it an ecosystem, a better ui, easy and cheaper gaming. And hopefully with SteamBox and SteamOS, they'll bring decent hardware and decent software to their ecosystem.... breaking away from PC Gaming and becoming it's own platform.
iOS offers fun games with decent graphics. Has some exclusives, very nice ui and ecosystem etc etc. It's not optimized for TV, but with a 5S, AppleTV, and AirPlay the experience scales nicely. All that's needed is for Apps to convert to iOS 7 Standard and offer gamepad support. And have a decent quality gamepad.
Android has a lot of issues. I don't know where to begin. With the case with iOS, Apple puts many restrictions into its ecosystem but eventually this QC System serves to make a consistent and higher quality experience. Android gives a lot of freedom to users. In fact too much. Why would a simple Calculator App require the ability to read Call Logs, I dunno ask Google. To turn this into a legitimate competitor against a potential iConsole would require a massive overhaul. And to turn it into a SteamOS/BOX competitor less likely. And virtually impossible to become a PS3 alternative, let alone a XB1.
That's my knowledgeable insight and honest opinions anyways.
On a TV the gaming experience ranges like this:
Xbox 1 > PS4 > PS3 > Xbox 360 > SteamOS / PC Gaming > iOS > Android / PS Vita TV.
...
That's my knowledgeable insight and honest opinions anyways.
Hi Kangal,
Never thought about it like that but yeah I agree
I can't stand Apple products, the way they restrict their HW intensionally.
If they did release a micro-console, it wouldn't be a very flexible ie limited USB/BT support.
Android I tolerate (and sometimes like), with the linux kernel it can support a lot of peripherals!
I don't look at the graphics potential of systems anymore but flexibility.
What can I do on it besides play games??
The consoles play media but not like VLC or mplayer!
I think the masses are wanting a fuller "set-top box" experience.
I see micro-consoles has a hybrid between console's and PC's.
A small box with PC capacities
Obviously, I'd prefer a linux distro but Android does the job!
SteamBox.. again between console and PC.
But from the photos of their prototypes looks like an original XBox in size!
So they are going after the console market and not the micro-console.
It's going to be interesting their price point.. they would have to be cheaper then the PS4, I would say even cheaper then a PS3 but I doubt it.
Anyone can buy a PC/laptop and play it on a tv with a PS3/360 controller, so are they??
Not in masses because PC gamers love keyboard & mouse, so SteamBox isn't for them.
Valve should have started with just the controller and saw how well it sold.
Maybe their controller is revisionary and will make people move to SteamBox?
If they include libre office, maybe they can be an OEM like Dell lol
The reason most people CAN use controllers on PC but DONT is because:
1- The amount of PC Gamers isn't THAT big
2- The top played PC Games are FPS and RPGs
3- Most PC Gamers usually own a console too, so they play their Car Racing games and Fifa games on that
4- Ease of use. Plug N Play, no need to fiddle with a DS3 driver
5- Some games don't convert (mouse) that well to controller (joysticks). Software limitation imposed by lack of support from SONY, Microsoft and Nintendo.
6- Some games can support controllers nicely, but playing those with controllers puts you at an immediate disadvantage to KBD+Mouse players.
...and lastly, most PCs are setup on desks with KBD+Mouse hunching over on a chair... using a controller just "feels weird" unlike laying on a couch in the living room where a KBD+Mouse would "feel weird" hunching over on a comfy chair.
Steam is trying to make a niche. Get those PC Gamers to create superior consoles and have them attached to the TV for superior graphics and superior features/functionality (PC). And use SteamBox(es) to get there. And use STEAM OS to deliver the content. And since this will be on a couch, players will rely on the SteamPad which sort of is a controller with a better "mousing" ability. I don't know if they'll ban KBD+Mouse connectivity for gaming. Or they might make it available and unfair. Or they might allow it but make a "handicap" for those using the controller like extra points/lives/abilities.
