Yoshi-P says discussions about FFXIV on Switch and Xbox One are "Positive"

- deleted -

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Zeonx

He began at the very start of the game he has pictures back from 2002.

People claim they started at the very beginning but tons of you probably started at 2004 or 2006 cause like you say its bs.

---

You questioning if ppl played in 2002 is hilarious. Unless they had a JP PS2 /w JP PS2 disc or PC with the JP software and a VPN in that era (or lived/stationed in JP). They are lying, to include him. Even the JP PC version didn't release til Nov of 2002. NA beta wasn't even til 2003.

I started with PC Beta in 2003 and even grabbed the PS2 HDD Kit when it released in 2004.

RoZ being the 1st expansion and initial NA release had a ton of texture replacements due to size of the expansion and changes to the game. The game was going international, the addition of the level cap increase, and the new storyline added. If I dig my original PC release disc out, there were even a ton of no longer used dats still on the NA Release disc and dats not even utilized at all.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Zeonx

..

---

He must have a really good memory to remember such details 16 years ago ;)
And to reply to when i started, i've played since 2003 (when the game was released in the west), i doubt your cousin played JP.

I say it's bs cause it is. I have no memory of anything being turned down or removed so this leaves us to a he said she said.

He told me to stop talking to you guys about it.
Said you are going to believe what you want to believe that the only you are correct ones he knows he's right but doesn't have to prove it, he said if he could post here he would show you some things but he's just going to let it go that there is no sense in talking to people who just say you are wrong.

I can't speak for him but I remember him playing back then also this is getting a bit off topic anyways.

so I am backing out myself it ain't because of what you said its just no point in trying to convince people who have their mind made up.

Like he said, any how later also it was called square co., before it was square enix. anyways later.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Zeonx

He told me to stop talking to you guys about it.
Said you are going to believe what you want to believe that the only you are correct ones he knows he's right but doesn't have to prove it, he said if he could post here he would show you some things but he's just going to let it go that there is no sense in talking to people who just say you are wrong.

I can't speak for him but I remember him playing back then also this is getting a bit off topic anyways.

so I am backing out myself it ain't because of what you said its just no point in trying to convince people who have their mind made up.

Like he said, any how later also it was called square co., before it was square enix. anyways later.

---

If he has proof he Or YOU cause I don't believe it's him. I believe you are the one saying it and just using this person you know as a safey wall. But if there's proof show people. Noone is going to believe empty statements like this without proof.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by ko_

If he has proof he Or YOU cause I don't believe it's him. I believe you are the one saying it and just using this person you know as a safey wall. But if there's proof show people. Noone is going to believe empty statements like this without proof.

---

the poster above who said it was jp is correct but cousin wasn't playing on his own computer he had a friend do it for him after he played for a while the friend moved and took his pc so he had to go purchase his own and he played with 2 friends even his friend told me to not deal with forums cause of course they will say no just to be right and I think this is the case.

haha and you saying I use my cousin as a wall? but he is real I just cant say his name on here cause then I don't wanna get in trouble by the GM's for mentioning names.

anyways just like I said before I think this topic has gone off topic so I am done.

matter of fact think I will take a break from forums. I usually don't type this long.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Zeonx

stuff

---

I'm just saying it looks fishy cause all anyone has to go on from you is a he said. It'll help if you had like the proof needed so people can't say no. It's like saying my dad works at Sega and provide NO proof what so ever other than. My dad said they are making a sonic forces 2. I know cause I seen it. and then post a picture of Sonic leaning on a number 2. It's not proof and people will call it out. Is all I'm saying.

My uncle works for Nintendo.

My sisters boyfriends uncles best friends ex-cellmates brothers cousins dad has played every FF ever since it was still in development and being actively coded. He confirms everything Zeonx has said is true.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Zeonx

http://i.imgur.com/z9kxuUg.png <--- this was removed along with other stuff.

---

I dont think fireworks is a great example of being removed. Some fireworks in FFXIV was also just once obtainable. Doesnt mean it's removed.

Anyway it was a item from FFXI second birthday event. A Goblin in Jeuno sold it. They renamed it and it's called Popper now. You can get it from special chests.

Can the Switch even handle this game? That thing has some low end specs to be playing games like FFXIV.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Cirgellon

Can the Switch even handle this game? That thing has some low end specs to be playing games like FFXIV.

---

TLDR = Yes I'd be very surprised if it couldn't. This game is playable on a GT 730 which the Switch handily beats.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Sebazy

In all honesty, I'm surprised people seem to think that the Switch is so utterly incapable of handling this game. On the GPU side, the Tegra X1 in the switch sits roughly between the GTX 750 and the GT 730 (Which has a better core count, but also a significantly slower memory setup than even the Switch). The 730 struggles with certain sequences (HW's Alex transition is an easy example) due to it's slow memory but the 750 handles things very respectably on medium/high settings. With the inevitable axing of texture quality to get the storage requirements under control, 30 fps at 720-900p is well within grasp with the current game IMHO.

---

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Sebazy

The PS3 client was memory limited from day one, remember how segments of the UI needed to be cut out to get the minimal TP bars in? PS3 memory limitation right there. Don't believe me? Note how we got all these new UI elements right as the PS3 support got cut. The CPU and GPU weren't an issue, it was entirely down to that trifling 256+256mb rambus ram configuration not playing nice in a game where you can't tightly control and predict assets.

Standing in Kugane by the market board at max settings sees my PC using just over 1GB of ram, lets be super crazy generous and set aside another 1GB for the GPU for this and we've still got at least another 1GB sat free on our imaginary Switch client.

---

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Sebazy

TLDR = Yes I'd be very surprised if it couldn't. This game is playable on a GT 730 which the Switch handily beats.

---

That is under the minimum requirements for processor and graphics. It's fine on ram.

Doesn't change the fact that it actually runs perfectly fine. As noted, the only significant slowdown I'm aware of is Alexander's lake animation which could be easily optimised with minimal work.

I personally ended up raiding for a month on a Thinkpad which had a GT 620M GPU in it (granted this was back during Midas), worse still compared to a desktop GT 730 and considerably slower than the Switch's Tegra X1.

Between the extra performance the Switch has coupled with the inevitable axing of visual quality to get the file size under control would make this a pretty straight forward port from a technical stand point. The legalities and network access side of things is almost certainly the bigger issue here though.

*edit* Just to add. I'm not blowing hot air here. I've got actual technical experience in this field. Probably the most relevant would be my work on the PS2 port of Quake III. We quite literally halved the requirements of that game through a combination of aggressive BSP optimisation and half sized textures. Until we started incorporating the Team Arena stuff we were even running at a stable 60 FPS on the dev kits. By comparison, an FFXIV port would be a piece of cake and frankly I wouldn't be surprised if it hasn't already been done quietly on one of the in-house dev kits.

I would not include Performance and Switch in the same sentence, lol

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Maero

I would not include Performance and Switch in the same sentence, lol

---

You seem to be under the illusion that FFXIV is a demanding game.

Well, Yoshida has finally mentioned Sony as one of the reasons https://kotaku.com/final-fantasy-xiv...ps4-1827024591

If I had to guess, they are waiting from Microsoft to waive the sub requirement, but despite what many naysayers said here, the situation with Sony blocking crossplay in Fortnite and other titles also affects FFXIV.

Quote:

---

We’ve also run into an issue with Sony - being able to play cross-platform. That’s another issue that we’d have to take care of as well.

---

Quote:

---

On whether Sony will allow Final Fantasy XIV to have cross-play with platforms beside PC

“We had discussions with Andrew House before, but with the transition to a new president I’m afraid we have not properly met them yet, had proper introductions, or sat down for a discussion,” Yoshida said. (Sony’s new president, Kenichiro Yoshida, started in April.)

“So unfortunately we don’t have any visibility on the current stance Sony is taking. We’re hoping that with the transition there may be some kind of shift but we have not had the opportunity to sit down and discuss.”

---

"B-but XI and PS2..." are literally irrelevant for this, that was a completely different generation of consoles for a completely different game, the only thing that matters right now is their current policy.

Good, I'm glad this is getting out in the open. First, it was Psyonix, developers of Rocket League. They stated the infrastructure for cross-platform play had already been completed, but they couldn't get the go ahead from Sony. Epic essentially said the same thing, then they accidentally enabled crossplay for about a day and no one at Sony or Microsoft even noticed until users started reporting it and Epic fixed the "problem." Then Microsoft says they're trying to work with Sony to make Minecraft cross-platform, but Sony responds with some bullshit statement about "protecting the kids." Then just last week, this topic comes roaring back into the news again because Switch owners discovered that linking your Epic account to PS4 locked your account to every other platform and Epic makes it very clear in their error message that it is not their fault and to not contact their support (i.e. the subtext there being, "be mad at Sony, not us).

Which brings us this. Yoshi-P and Square Enix finally speaking up. Although he doesn't necessarily level any harsh criticsm at Sony, he's making it very clear who is at fault.

I hope more developers and publishers come out the woodwork to lay into them. Gaming has changed. Locking 3rd-party games into these closed loops is an archaic process. Yes, I know, blahblahblah "but muh FPSes" blahblahblah shush. For the vast majority of games, crossplatform play just makes sense. FFXIV is one of those games.

The fact Sony is standing in the way of this should bother everyone especially because all the servers in cases like are run by each of those individual companies. Sony gets their cut of each copy sold and that should be enough for them. This whole thing makes them look weak.

I'm not sure how Sony has anything to do with this entire situation. As previously stated many times FFXIV is not on Xbox because of Microsoft, they are the ones preventing it, after all we already have PC/PS4 cross play. Unlikely to ever see a Switch port mostly because of limitations, PS3 was dropped for that very reason.

Back during the PS3 and 360 days it was Sony that wanted to implement crossplay with Microsoft refusing them. Now that the PS4 has the bigger pool of players, Microsoft obviously shifts their tone. It's nothing new, Microsoft and Nintendo aren't doing it out of the goodness of their hearts but out of pragmatism. As for Sony's stance, it's anti-consumerist, yes, but Sony has no reason to acquiesce. They'd just be adding value to titles on their competitors platforms while gaining nothing in return.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Kurando

I'm not sure how Sony has anything to do with this entire situation. As previously stated many times FFXIV is not on Xbox because of Microsoft, they are the ones preventing it, after all we already have PC/PS4 cross play. Unlikely to ever see a Switch port mostly because of limitations, PS3 was dropped for that very reason.

---

Except Microsoft has changed their tune over the past year or so and has been very open about their willingness to embrace crossplatform play. While I'm sure they are more details and red tape to this process that none of us are aware of, only one platform out there is actively against crossplatform play right now. Hint: it's the PS4. Nintendo, of all companies, put out and ad today with Xbox plastered all over the thing, in it showing two kids kids playing on two different platforms. The same Nintendo who barely knew how the internet worked just a few years ago. Microsoft and Nintendo both used to be real dumb. We all know it. Now, Sony has taken that stupidity crown, why shouldn't I be upset when they do it?

Also, several Switch games run in the cloud including PSO2 and Resident Evil 7. Yes, I know, I don't think it's ideal either, but Yoshi-P has been the one out there saying how much they would like to port it to Switch so I assume he's well aware of any technical challenges.

I know they aren't doing this out of the goodness of their hearts. I'm not exactly planning on sending Christmas cards to Phil or Reggie. The point is they're doing something good for the industry, and it doesn't matter why they're doing it, while Sony is sitting in the back, twiddling their thumbs. And they deserve to be called out for it.

Ok but the thread isn't about other cross role titles, it's about FFXIV which currently is unavailable to play on Xbox because of a restrictions Microsoft are setting that SE do not agree with. Microsoft are preventing it, and they are at fault on this occasion.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Kurando

Ok but the thread isn't about other cross role titles, it's about FFXIV which currently is unavailable to play on Xbox because of a restrictions Microsoft are setting that SE do not agree with. Microsoft are preventing it, and they are at fault on this occasion.

---

When did the last news come out that said this?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Sarevok_Thordin

When did the last news come out that said this?

---

A Kotaku interview turned up to day with it, here's the section on cross play. By the looks of it Microsoft are still the problem, but SE are aware that Sony is going to be a problem but things haven't got far enough for them to even speak to them about it

“We had discussions with Andrew House before, but with the transition to a new president I’m afraid we have not properly met them yet, had proper introductions, or sat down for a discussion,” Yoshida said. (Sony’s new president, Kenichiro Yoshida, started in April.)

“So unfortunately we don’t have any visibility on the current stance Sony is taking. We’re hoping that with the transition there may be some kind of shift but we have not had the opportunity to sit down and discuss.”

Quote taken from the Kotaku page.

There is no scenario in which more players in an MMO is not an extremely good thing.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by jameseoakes

A Kotaku interview turned up to day with it, here's the section on cross play. By the looks of it Microsoft are still the problem, but SE are aware that Sony is going to be a problem but things haven't got far enough for them to even speak to them about it

“We had discussions with Andrew House before, but with the transition to a new president I’m afraid we have not properly met them yet, had proper introductions, or sat down for a discussion,” Yoshida said. (Sony’s new president, Kenichiro Yoshida, started in April.)

“So unfortunately we don’t have any visibility on the current stance Sony is taking. We’re hoping that with the transition there may be some kind of shift but we have not had the opportunity to sit down and discuss.”

Quote taken from the Kotaku page.

---

It also states that Microsoft have not waived the policies that are keeping Yoshi-P from putting the game on their system either,.

Even if sony said -yes- you still have to deal with Xbox's issue with needing GOLD to play which YP doesn't want. So either way it goes it's going to still be mircosoft who needs to change also. Changing the goal post doesn't change the fact xbox users would still need gold to play. which is a no no.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by ko_

Even if sony said -yes- you still have to deal with Xbox's issue with needing GOLD to play which YP doesn't want. So either way it goes it's going to still be mircosoft who needs to change also. Changing the goal post doesn't change the fact xbox users would still need gold to play. which is a no no.

---

As I recall, they also wanted their own servers so they could have players segregate themselves from the other platforms...

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Mahri

There is no scenario in which more players in an MMO is not an extremely good thing.

---

I agree to an extent. However I'd rather not see them port the game over to a device that will become the next meme about not being able to get something done due to limitations. We just recently cut a system out for that very reason, why reintroduce what will become the next excuse?

I think it's a shame Sony are blocking cross platform support. It's making them look bad, considering they have such a market lead over the XBone , they should at least be open to multi platform support, this late in the consoles life. In the next 3 years we will be on the PS5 and Xbox4 . I hope this game gets moved onto the PS5 early on as I love playing on my PS4Pro , but would be amazed to see this game at it's full potentional.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Kyuuen

I agree to an extent. However I'd rather not see them port the game over to a device that will become the next meme about not being able to get something done due to limitations. We just recently cut a system out for that very reason, why reintroduce what will become the next excuse?

---

The issues are basically two technical and one political/money.

Sony doesn't want cross-play because of the potential for users on other platforms to cheat, and it wants it's cut of subscriber revenue
Microsoft doesn't want cross-play because then they won't get their cut from the Live requirement.
Nintendo is more than willing to allow cross-play, but their systems are significantly weaker than the competition.

Steam (PC/Mac) wants their cut if subscribed via Steam, however "Steam" versions of games tend to only involve the initial purchase.

Windows and MacOS stand-alone versions are the only versions that actually aren't hobbled by some political/money issue. However the PC platform is also the one with the weakest toasters and potatos playing it.

So the tech issue is actually the weakest one. The Xbone, PS4, Switch and a $800 laptop are within the same realm of performance. Citing "cheating" as a reason to not support cross-platform is actually kinda insane because no platform is free of cheating, especially not the PC. MMORPG's however are client-server setups and the extent to "cheating" we see are not the same kinds of cheats that FPS and PvP RPG games are overwhelmed with. The lack of any open world PvP is what largely prevents being able to grief or harass players in the game.

So it's just about money. Making "PS4-only" or "Xbox Live only" servers defeats the purpose of having a MMORPG, because that gives the game a definitive end-of-life. If Microsoft wants to keep pretending that MMORPG's are not a thing, they are more than welcome to keep refusing money.

I would love to have FFXIV on the switch. Sadly, I don't see it happening. The switch has a lot of graphical limitations

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Gemina

That's interesting, considering that Square abandoned Nintendo to produce FFVII for the PlayStation many, many moons ago due to the limitations of the Super Nintendo.

---

nope that was the problem with the N64 having cartridges over CDs which was why they chose the original Playstation over it.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by DeaconMoore

I honestly don't see the upside for Sony to cooperate with SE and link up with their competitors networks like this. It'd be a good deal for SE but Sony would lose out on an exclusive for the PS4.

---

The issue is it was never intended to be an exclusive at all. Pretty sure they made sure Sony was well aware of this from the start

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Derio

I highly doubt this, especially considering both Microsoft and Nintendo have not changed their patch/udpate policy. Nintendo being far worse on their policy. Also last I have heard Microsoft has not stopped requiring Xbox Live to play online MMOs, so that is the nail in the coffin that they need to removed.

Also PS+ has and will always not be required to play FFXIV

---

Don Mattrick The person in charge of XBox at the launch of the XB One is responsible for us not having XIV on it. I'm also pretty sure they can still allow some multiplayer games without Gold. There is a huge chance we might get it on there now that Phil Spencer is in charge. It wouldn't be that hard to port to the Xbox One considering both the PS4 and Xbox One use AMD Jaguar CPUs that are almost identical(the PS4 got a slightly better GPU on their chip but not by a lot)

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Rinuko

MS is the reason you are not getting a XIV port. They want the service go over their servers and possibly even require a gold membership.

---

this was their stance before with Don Mattrick, They now have new management(Phil Spencer) for the XBox division of Microsoft so things changed

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by ReplicaX

The issue with MS always has been.

---

not any more

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Noshpan

It will never be on Switch. It would be like trying to play XIV on a PC that still uses XP.

---

technically this can be done, it isn't wise but it can be as long as you have a way to install/copy it to your XP machine the only technical reason it wouldn't run would be actual hardware limitations not the OS itself.

To be honest, I'm wondering when the day will come that gamers will get tired of the playground crap between Microsoft and Sony and put their feet down and say "Screw this, we're not giving either one of you our money".

That's all this is, Microsoft and Sony acting like spoiled little kids at recess that can't get along with each other.

People should just dump them both and go to PC. *shrugs*

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Maeka

To be honest, I'm wondering when the day will come that gamers will get tired of the playground crap between Microsoft and Sony and put their feet down and say "Screw this, we're not giving either one of you our money".

That's all this is, Microsoft and Sony acting like spoiled little kids at recess that can't get along with each other.

People should just dump them both and go to PC. *shrugs*

---

Well, to be fair, as much as I don't always agree with Microsoft and Sony's shenanigans regarding XIV and other games, dumping both companies like that because they won't do cross-play functions is, at least to me, acting about as childish as they are regarding the issue. That's also not to mention that not all of the games I like playing tied to Microsoft and Sony can always be found on PC either.

Companies make decisions that consumers don't always agree or understand fully on a daily basis. That's just how things are in this world, best to keep going forward with life and enjoy gaming as a hobby regardless.

On another note, even if a gamer was to dump Sony and Microsoft's consoles and go strictly to PC.....well, guess which two companies still continue to hold shares and make products for PC? It's kind of hard to get away from them both, especially Microsoft, who produces the very OS systems that you're using on your PC, to be fair.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Sigma-Astra

On another note, even if a gamer was to dump Sony and Microsoft's consoles and go strictly to PC.....well, guess which two companies still continue to hold shares and make products for PC? It's kind of hard to get away from them both, especially Microsoft, who produces the very OS systems that you're using on your PC, to be fair.

---

Microsoft is a large company with different divisions.

Their XBOX division is not the same division that handles their Windows OS. So, by refusing to give money to their XBOX division, that division will make less money and if enough people did this, they might rethink their practices. But of course this takes a lot of people and few people have the willpower to say No to all the shinies they offer. Pretty much the same way any large company can screw customers over and continue to do business. Not enough people willing to walk away.

And refusing both is not really childish; especially if that's not the only reason. There's also their anti-consumer practices of charging $50 a year just to play online (which you don't need to with a PC with Steam), how they handle their hardware (which borderlines scams; when I bought my XB360 (which was the last console I ever bought), I could pay one price for a 30GB HDD, and to get the 60GB model which is exactly same 'cept larger HDD, they wanted $100 more despite the fact that at the time you could buy a 150GB HDD for $80.

Consoles are a scam. They overprice their obsolete hardware and charge you ridiculous amounts of money for it, kinda like Apple does.

EDIT: Also, all three (Nintendo, Sony and XB) are running PC-compatible hardware (even if it is obsolete) in their consoles, so what you are REALLY getting when you buy a console is a gimped PC with a special OS that prevents you from doing stuff a PC owner could do, that is impossible to repair/service/upgrade at the end-user level unlike a real PC, lol. So you're getting all the Cons and none of the Pros except maybe price. But considering a good PC will last through two console generations, are you really saving any money?

EDIT2: I'll give the Switch some leeway because at least it's a handheld portable device that's much smaller than a laptop.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Maeka

Microsoft is a large company with different divisions.

Their XBOX division is not the same division that handles their Windows OS. So, by refusing to give money to their XBOX division, that division will make less money and if enough people did this, they might rethink their practices. But of course this takes a lot of people and few people have the willpower to say No to all the shinies they offer. Pretty much the same way any large company can screw customers over and continue to do business. Not enough people willing to walk away.

---

True, but you're not quite seeing my entire viewpoint here. Even if the division in charge of Xbox were losing finances due towards people walking away from one of their products. You're still, as a consumer, giving them your money one way or another through other means. If you're going to boycott a company, you'd have to do so entirely otherwise they won't really care if you're not giving them money in Product A, but still willing to support them in Product B. Either way, the company still wins and you still lose because they're making money off of you in the end, just a bit less than before.

That's why boycotts for large companies tend to fail because even if you fail to support their one practice completely, you're still fueling them in other means whether willingly or unwillingly. If you're going to boycott against Xbox, then you'd have to boycott against Microsoft entirely and well....that's easier said than done really.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Sigma-Astra

-snip-

---

Except for the fact that at the top-level, a CEO will look at the big picture, of their entire company.

Let's say theoretically the CEO of Microsoft is sitting at a board meeting, and they have their entire company's earnings on this fancy power point thing, and they see that XBOX is really tanking in sales, while the other divisions of their company are doing great.

Guess what's going to happen to the XBOX division? People get put on notice, or fired, or restructured, maybe the CEO will start giving orders for them to shape up or ship out. Companies oftentimes cut divisions that aren't making it.

EDIT: That, and I have not, and have no plans of, buying Windows10. I'm still running the same Win7 license that I got 5+ years ago and it will be good for at least two more years. Maybe by then, who knows, maybe there will be a better option. But still, giving them $1000+ during the next 3 years or $100 ... that's a pretty big difference. This means that in the last 5 years + next 2-3 years, Microsoft only made $100 off of me. Compare that to someone who bought an XB1 and then a XB1S and yearly subs. That'd be what, like $800 + $400.... $1200.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Maeka

And refusing both is not really childish; especially if that's not the only reason. There's also their anti-consumer practices of charging $50 a year just to play online (which you don't need to with a PC with Steam), how they handle their hardware (which borderlines scams; when I bought my XB360 (which was the last console I ever bought), I could pay one price for a 30GB HDD, and to get the 60GB model which is exactly same 'cept larger HDD, they wanted $100 more despite the fact that at the time you could buy a 150GB HDD for $80.

Consoles are a scam. They overprice their obsolete hardware and charge you ridiculous amounts of money for it, kinda like Apple does.

EDIT: Also, all three (Nintendo, Sony and XB) are running PC-compatible hardware (even if it is obsolete) in their consoles, so what you are REALLY getting when you buy a console is a gimped PC with a special OS that prevents you from doing stuff a PC owner could do, that is impossible to repair/service/upgrade at the end-user level unlike a real PC, lol. So you're getting all the Cons and none of the Pros except maybe price. But considering a good PC will last through two console generations, are you really saving any money?

EDIT2: I'll give the Switch some leeway because at least it's a handheld portable device that's much smaller than a laptop.

---

No offense, but you sound like a person who was burned by consoles and now you have this hyperbole paranoia about them. Consoles aren't really a scam, they're another form of entertainment for people who can't afford a custom PC build or multiple PC's in their home really. A standard PS4 to run XIV will costs you about $299 while a decent, custom PC with the specs to run XIV at it's best settings may run you twice over that initial amount. Sure, the PC will probably last you longer and has interchangeable parts that you can repair and replace at your own leisure, but again, it's still quite a hefty sum to produce.

And back then, consoles were the most sought after means of personal gaming entertainment for most people like the very first Sega and Nintendo console. You seem like a pro PC player over anything else, which is fine, while I'm just on the fence and can accept both means to an end as viable ways to find entertainment since one way is not any better or worse than the other if it means the person is happy.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Maeka

Snip

---

I think you're underestimating the convenience of consoles. No troubleshooting, no need for knowledge of tech outside plugging in an HDMI, and the price above all else. I think you're also blowing the price out of proportion. I paid $300 for my PS4 and an included game+controller 5 years ago and it still works the exact same as it did then, plus no OS to buy. There is no reason to upgrade until the PS5 releases unless it burns out, which is not common unless you get a dud.

Comparatively, I paid ~$1200 for my PC components, another $500 on monitors, an additional $40 for my mouse, and over $100 for my keyboard. And while I received my OS free courtesy of my company, that would have been another $120 minimum - $200 for Pro, unless you can configure WINE on Linux which is a nightmare in and of itself.

While my PC is obviously far superior, and you could do a much cheaper build that would still perform very well, you can't really get close to the price of consoles. While PC components may last you 10 years, by the end of that you're probably not playing at the cutting edge anymore anyways, and a console generation is typically about 7 years. You aren't getting 14 years out of your components if you're using them regularly. The average PC player upgrades every 5-7 years anyways, if not faster. And I could buy 5 consoles for the price of my single PC build. For that matter, a cutting edge processor or GPU alone can cost 3-4x as much as an entire console.

TL;DR: The only scams consoles are really committing is the lack of backwards compatibility in modern consoles and console exclusives. The hardware isn't cutting edge by any means, but it's certainly adequate and will play any game on the market. Just because it doesn't do shiny 4k at 144Hz doesn't make it a scam, that isn't what they're designed for. I do agree that their online pay-to-play structure is weird and unnecessary, but even 7 years worth of that doesn't come close to my PC cost once.

As for your other point, boycotting Xbox will never be effective. While theoretically possible, there are way too many poor/lower-middle class people who can't afford PCs for that to ever be realistic.

EDIT: Not to say I'm not pro-PC if you can afford it, but consoles have their place and don't deserve the scorn they get from PC players just because they aren't rolling in cash.

EDIT 2:

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Maeka

This means that in the last 5 years + next 2-3 years, Microsoft only made $100 off of me. Compare that to someone who bought an XB1 and then a XB1S and yearly subs. That'd be what, like $800 + $400.... $1200.

---

If you're buying every console iteration, sure, save the money and buy a PC, but most people don't do this. Especially poorer people. But even the price you listed is less than a high end PC and you got 2 systems for it, one of which you could sell to recoup money or give it to a friend/significant other to use. And, if you want to get the most out of your High End PC, you're going to need at least 1440p monitors, because the 1080p TV you already have isn't going to make your purchase worth it, unlike with console, so that's a cost you can't ignore.