News Xbox One 'may not work' in unsupported countries

Well that's the thing the TOU state "Xbox One's New Terms of Service Restricts Consumers from Class Action Lawsuits"
That's not saying anything has changed from the way it currently works with XBOX Live, and the PS4's TOU is exactly the same.

Although its uncertain yet if this and the prevention on selling second hand games violate EU laws.

 

I don't know how the law works in the rest of the world, but in the UK you can't sign away your statutory rights. There's even a specific law covering unfair contracts: 'The Unfair Terms in Consumer Contracts Regulations 1999'. Just because a company puts a clause in a contract, it doesn't automatically mean that clause is legal or enforceable.

Not that class action lawsuits are popular over here anyway, but just saying...

 

Good luck enforcing this in eu, steam already failed to do so and had to edit its TOS.

Eu laws are alot harder to bypass than USA and others laws that's why most companies launching products here have different TOS compared to rest of the world.

I expected the ban thing since all your games are locked to Xbox live account they ban that account you lose your games. Steam did do a similar thing to account sellers.

 

LAW can't be overwritten by terms and conditions

if they clash the Terms and conditions are not worth the paper they're printed on.

 

The truth is: any decent-minded with some sense of understanding of tech would avoid those crappy upcoming consoles. Even little kids are better off using PCs and doing more than just playing those mostly degenerate games and watching those degenerate movies shows.

Hardware wise, the new consoles are low end PCs. 8 Jaguar cores are still gonna be a lot slower than my core I5 750 @ 3.97GHz, and bottleneck the 7870 class GPU.

We need better visuals with intensive tessellation, and better mechanics instead of the current gen of physics engines with the same old primitive mechanics.

Heck, Battlefield 4 was such a disappointment. They're using the same crappy physics where moving the character feels like moving a robotic vehicle, and the visuals are really the same, with the same fogginess and blue/gray tint.

 

But the sad thing is probably around 90% of people pay no attention to the technical details of the hardware they buy
And even more people just skip the legal speak when signing on the dotted line....

 

I dunno, a computer the size of a pizza box that can play the the latest games for the next 5-7 years with no problems and costs £349, sounds like a great deal to me.

Nah, those things are nice but nothing beats immersion and brings a game to life like a good story. I'd play Metal Gear Solid and the old Final Fantasies any time over the likes of the Crysis series.

There's no doubt fancy graphics look amazing, but a strong storyline beats it anyday for me.

 

I'm interested in this. I just specified a gaming PC for a friend of mine who wanted to spend about 500 quid, which is more than either of these new consoles will sell for. My advice at the time was that chasing the specs of the upcoming consoles was likely to get expensive, as to get even eight virtual cores he'd need an i7 and a very big graphics card worth £300 plus to match the integrated graphics.

Was I possibly a bit pessimistic?

 

It's not all about specs when it comes to consoles, look at the PS3/360 specs and you will be able to play BF4 on them.

The pros and cons of PC v consoles are wide and varied, some people will have more reasons to go for a console, some for PC.

 

This just keeps getting better and better.

Do they hate money at Microsoft?

 

You can buy an overall-faster HTPC box for less that today. Heck, I would sell you my whole rig, with the case for that much money. I've got 8GBs of RAM, a 6970 and a P55/I5 750 @ 4GHz build.

No doubt! But immersion comes from realism. The ability to immerse into the virtual environment has mainly to do with being able to react the way you would in real life or in you fantasy world. The ability to jump in a certain way, or stab instead of swinging your sword in the same moronic pattern in every fight.
Not getting stuck by a 10cm high pavement or little things in Battlefield 3, for say, instead of stepping over them, or having to moonwalk sideways when under fire, instead of jumping sideways is pathetic mechanics.

Graphics add to the experience in the same way. Obviously we're drawn into realistic visuals. I wouldn't compare Davenci's, or Rafael's art, for example, to the degenerate art of this modern age.

The storylines are pathetic, mostly filled with cultural Marxism and degeneracy. The white Western morals of hardworking, seeking truth, being adventurous, and loving and protecting your people and nation is nowhere to be found in those modern games.

 

Are those brand new parts with full warranty? Can you guarantee that they will play new releases at "acceptable" framerates for the next 7 years?

There's no doubt that good graphics and realism add to a game, but they are now the standard when it comes to selling the games, who cares what the story is like as long as it looks amazing, it's just boring now.

 

No, the computer is four-year old, and all the parts are out of Warranty. The point is, you can get better computers than those consoles, hardware wise, at the same price or even lower, and use them for both gaming and other purposes.
On the other hand, I've never had single blue screen in those four years or so with the rig. Actually, my two older PCs are still working fine, and those are 8 and 12 year old computers. A PC built of quality parts is more likely to last longer and perform more consistently than one of those consoles.

Most games are console ports and look horrible. The so called PC games are just coded with scaling in mind, but still, not coded to put PC resources into efficient use.

Also, most PC games run on DX11's virtual runtime, where their execution on hardware is managed by a process that takes care of the actual execution on hardware including the final compilation to machine code.
This virtual runtime is not as efficient as it should be. And Microsoft isn't putting enough effort into improving it and further utilizing it for modern CPUs and GPUs.
I'm pretty sure that the DX11 runtime doesn't compile to AVX, AVX2 and FMA machine code that can up to quadruple execution speed of many workloads (ones that compile to 128/64 bit SSE code normally).

Overall, I don't see a bright future for PC gaming. Those games are getting worse both content and experience wise.

 

I'm not disagreeing with that but will it be able to play a big new release in 2020 (BF7 or whatever)? I doubt it. The longevity of consoles compared to PC parts make them great value.

 

If you lower the quality settings, most likely yes. Most PC games can scale up and down in quality.
My old Radeon 850XT can play Crysis 2 on low settings and output decently smooth frame rates.

 

At similar low details as XBOX will get in 2020 ? Sure, why not. And you are confusing longevity with stagnation - consoles stagnate the gaming market.

 

Nobody is saying they aren't. But I'm sure some people like knowing that they can drop £400 on a console and it will play everything that is thrown at it for the next 7 years.

 

You'd need to be pairing it with a 2004 single core at 2ghz and a single GB of RAM if you were aiming to build a £500 PC at the time of the 360 release and still use it today. If that did run a few cross platform games it would be a much worse experience than a console.

You could also add a few hundred pounds to your budget over the next 7 years as well due to your "console" also being your desktop that you'd have regardless.

 

Why would he pair it with 2004 single core, if he aims at performance similar to 2006 XBOX 360 ? A $183 Core 2 Duo E6300 would fit the time and money restrictions .

 

THe 360 was a Q4 2005 release.
If you could predict the future you'd have been very well served by waiting half a year to get an affordable dual core but at that point only singles cores would of been in budget.