XBox One vs. PS4 again...
I have a terrible memory and couldn't remember when the launch day for the 2 systems was, so when I walked into Futureshop and saw a section for the PS4 and display boxes I thought it was available already and it struck me just how much more compelling the PS4 is when it is the only next gen platform available. Sure, it will only truly carry this distinction for a week. But I was tempted to try and buy one yesterday and it isn't even the console I'm wanting to lean towards.
All of this sparked back up some of the thoughts I had before about this. And I think I'm still more a fan of the Xbox One than the PS4.
First for me is eco-system. I own a lot of Microsoft products, including a Windows Phone device. Even if it is just a small degree of interaction, it is something that won't exist for me on the PS4. If I were a Mac/Android fan, this would be a non-issue for me as neither platform really offers anything in that case.
Next is Project Spark. Until it launches on the Xbox One it is hard to say the impact this will have. But an extensible game development platform built on the hardware could mean a huge surge in indie game development. And, the tools are good enough that even relatively inexperienced enthusiasts could create more than decent content. This could, long-term, end up being the single biggest reason to purchase an Xbox One. This piece also speaks to me as an idealist. It isn't the perfect answer, but it makes the Xbox One the ONLY modern platform that brings development (on at least one level) to the platform.
I've long been complaining that NONE of Windows Phone, Windows RT, Android or iOS offer a 1st party native development platform. And on many levels Spark isn't either. But on some levels it most certainly is. And as a developer, that is huge to me. Even if I don't plan on using it. Every developer out there should be backing this system for this reason alone. If it becomes the driving force in both development and sales you can bet your ass it will provoke other companies to follow suit. And eventually we should see greater openness again in modern operating systems.
Third is Kinect 2.0. Or rather, Kinect + the decision to ship every console with it. This is purely long term. But, there are studios or even franchises within studios that are platform specific. These are the people for whom features like this, and Sony's touchpads are interesting. I think Sony's touchpad is lame a gimmicky by comparison, but much of what I'm about to say still applies.
When there is hardware for a system that you can guarantee will be there when building a platform specific game, you would be a fool not to try and use it. In the past, since you couldn't guarantee people would have a Kinect even if you were building an Xbox 360 specific game, you basically only bothered using the Kinect if it was intended as a primary means of input. And so all you got was silly games that forced you to stand up and make a fool of yourself. But, as a mandatory component, any game can safely add it, and add it only the ways in which it makes sense. Perhaps leveraging voice commands to direct a squadron, or motion to interact with a HUD type display. The value of a piece of hardware like the Kinect is actually more pronounced when you aren't basically required to choose to either use it or not.
When it is simply an extension of the system, another tool all people have access too, that is when I think it will really shine. I don't want to feel compelled to get up an dance just because I own a Kinect sensor. But I wouldn't mind being forced to use it to pick a lock. Or to perhaps give me a finer degree of control over my characters for those moments where more precision might be beneficial.
Last on my list of pros for the Xbox One is the HDMI pass through. Given the amount of jeering I've heard on this I think I may be alone here. But I HATE having to change the channel on my TV to switch between Cable and Console. I use that remote for 2.5 things. Turning the TV on/off, switching between TV and PS3 and every once in a while when my typical volume isn't ideal, for changing the volume. That remote is never in a convenient place. Ever. Channels are changed via the Cable remote. Apps are controlled and changed via the PS3 remote. And the TV for some reason takes forever to change channels. So yes, this is a gimmicky feature to say the least... but it definitely speaks to me.
Performance seems to be squarely in the hands of the PS4. But others have made a good point. Studios will usually try and deliver the same performance on all systems they plan to target if they can unless tweaking it for one system versus another is trivial. So, even if the PS4 has more power than the Xbox One, most games will not be noticeably different between the 2 systems.
[update]
I was reading some articles the other day. And it was amusing to see some of the predictions I made around Kinect vs. the PS4 touch pad coming true already.
I was reading an article the other day that talked about the new Tomb Raider game being released on the Xbox One and PS4. On the Xbox One the Kinect can be used to issue voice commands for certain activities and on the PS4, the controller will light up when using a torch. No mention of leveraging the actual touch capabilities at all.
The article also said nothing about using the PS4 eye the same way as the Kinect.
Doesn't mean it won't. But I can only draw conclusions on the information available at the moment. And based on that information... doesn't it sound like developers can more easily add value to the Kinect, rather than to PS4's exclusive touch pad? It lights up! WOW! I think if I were playing a game, and the console specific feature it offered was to illuminate my controller I would feel like it was a beacon of idiocy. It literally adds nothing to the game. Voice controls on the other hand DO add another dimension to the gameplay.
Both are merely gimmicks in this title. Neither are integral or central to gameplay (makes sense because it came out before either console). Don't get me wrong on that. But at least the Xbox One gimmick is functional. It adds greater immersion to gameplay. It is a subtle, optional extension of the game which can serve to enrich the experience. In other words, the perfect type of platform specific add-on. By contrast, what they've done on the PS4 is tacky and useless. And, if Microsoft's API's for the Kinect are as good they are on their recent mobile platforms, the voice controls may have been easier to build in than the ridiculous lighting of the controller.
Anyway, the purpose of this is to "illuminate" my argument from later posts; If you have bought into one eco-system or the other, or there are platform specific games that matter to you... you still won't be disappointed with either system. If you're on the fence, the Xbox One is worth the extra $100.
This is just the first cross platform game example I've seen to leverage hardware specific to each console. There will be more. Some more impactful, some perhaps less impactful (though less impactful than lighting a controller up will be pretty hard).
[/update]
All of this sparked back up some of the thoughts I had before about this. And I think I'm still more a fan of the Xbox One than the PS4.
First for me is eco-system. I own a lot of Microsoft products, including a Windows Phone device. Even if it is just a small degree of interaction, it is something that won't exist for me on the PS4. If I were a Mac/Android fan, this would be a non-issue for me as neither platform really offers anything in that case.
Next is Project Spark. Until it launches on the Xbox One it is hard to say the impact this will have. But an extensible game development platform built on the hardware could mean a huge surge in indie game development. And, the tools are good enough that even relatively inexperienced enthusiasts could create more than decent content. This could, long-term, end up being the single biggest reason to purchase an Xbox One. This piece also speaks to me as an idealist. It isn't the perfect answer, but it makes the Xbox One the ONLY modern platform that brings development (on at least one level) to the platform.
I've long been complaining that NONE of Windows Phone, Windows RT, Android or iOS offer a 1st party native development platform. And on many levels Spark isn't either. But on some levels it most certainly is. And as a developer, that is huge to me. Even if I don't plan on using it. Every developer out there should be backing this system for this reason alone. If it becomes the driving force in both development and sales you can bet your ass it will provoke other companies to follow suit. And eventually we should see greater openness again in modern operating systems.
Third is Kinect 2.0. Or rather, Kinect + the decision to ship every console with it. This is purely long term. But, there are studios or even franchises within studios that are platform specific. These are the people for whom features like this, and Sony's touchpads are interesting. I think Sony's touchpad is lame a gimmicky by comparison, but much of what I'm about to say still applies.
When there is hardware for a system that you can guarantee will be there when building a platform specific game, you would be a fool not to try and use it. In the past, since you couldn't guarantee people would have a Kinect even if you were building an Xbox 360 specific game, you basically only bothered using the Kinect if it was intended as a primary means of input. And so all you got was silly games that forced you to stand up and make a fool of yourself. But, as a mandatory component, any game can safely add it, and add it only the ways in which it makes sense. Perhaps leveraging voice commands to direct a squadron, or motion to interact with a HUD type display. The value of a piece of hardware like the Kinect is actually more pronounced when you aren't basically required to choose to either use it or not.
When it is simply an extension of the system, another tool all people have access too, that is when I think it will really shine. I don't want to feel compelled to get up an dance just because I own a Kinect sensor. But I wouldn't mind being forced to use it to pick a lock. Or to perhaps give me a finer degree of control over my characters for those moments where more precision might be beneficial.
Last on my list of pros for the Xbox One is the HDMI pass through. Given the amount of jeering I've heard on this I think I may be alone here. But I HATE having to change the channel on my TV to switch between Cable and Console. I use that remote for 2.5 things. Turning the TV on/off, switching between TV and PS3 and every once in a while when my typical volume isn't ideal, for changing the volume. That remote is never in a convenient place. Ever. Channels are changed via the Cable remote. Apps are controlled and changed via the PS3 remote. And the TV for some reason takes forever to change channels. So yes, this is a gimmicky feature to say the least... but it definitely speaks to me.
Performance seems to be squarely in the hands of the PS4. But others have made a good point. Studios will usually try and deliver the same performance on all systems they plan to target if they can unless tweaking it for one system versus another is trivial. So, even if the PS4 has more power than the Xbox One, most games will not be noticeably different between the 2 systems.
[update]
I was reading some articles the other day. And it was amusing to see some of the predictions I made around Kinect vs. the PS4 touch pad coming true already.
I was reading an article the other day that talked about the new Tomb Raider game being released on the Xbox One and PS4. On the Xbox One the Kinect can be used to issue voice commands for certain activities and on the PS4, the controller will light up when using a torch. No mention of leveraging the actual touch capabilities at all.
The article also said nothing about using the PS4 eye the same way as the Kinect.
Doesn't mean it won't. But I can only draw conclusions on the information available at the moment. And based on that information... doesn't it sound like developers can more easily add value to the Kinect, rather than to PS4's exclusive touch pad? It lights up! WOW! I think if I were playing a game, and the console specific feature it offered was to illuminate my controller I would feel like it was a beacon of idiocy. It literally adds nothing to the game. Voice controls on the other hand DO add another dimension to the gameplay.
Both are merely gimmicks in this title. Neither are integral or central to gameplay (makes sense because it came out before either console). Don't get me wrong on that. But at least the Xbox One gimmick is functional. It adds greater immersion to gameplay. It is a subtle, optional extension of the game which can serve to enrich the experience. In other words, the perfect type of platform specific add-on. By contrast, what they've done on the PS4 is tacky and useless. And, if Microsoft's API's for the Kinect are as good they are on their recent mobile platforms, the voice controls may have been easier to build in than the ridiculous lighting of the controller.
Anyway, the purpose of this is to "illuminate" my argument from later posts; If you have bought into one eco-system or the other, or there are platform specific games that matter to you... you still won't be disappointed with either system. If you're on the fence, the Xbox One is worth the extra $100.
This is just the first cross platform game example I've seen to leverage hardware specific to each console. There will be more. Some more impactful, some perhaps less impactful (though less impactful than lighting a controller up will be pretty hard).
[/update]
Comments
Post a Comment