Slashdot Mirror

[Copyright] actually hasn't negatively impacted any e-sport to date

From "No streaming Brawl for MLG?" (2010): "However, I'm sorry to say that we will not be able to have a live stream for Smash in Orlando this weekend. In order to stream something like this, we have to secure live streaming rights from the game's publisher. And despite our best efforts, we have not been able to get permission from Nintendo thus far. We kept the conversation going all the way down to the wire, in hopes that we'd get an 11th hour approval and could still stream the event, but unfortunately it didn’t happen."

From "Brawl Prevented from the MLG Floor" (2014): "Despite Brawl’s appearance at almost all of the qualifier events, its presence on the 2010 MLG Pro Circuit, and MLG organizing equipment and funding for a Brawl tournament at Anaheim, it was not approved by Nintendo."

I'm interested in reading how these don't count as having "negatively impacted any e-sport".

The one that immediately springs to mind is the various id software court cases. but there are a lot of them, as mentioned in https://www.gamespot.com/artic...

Which mentions a single ID software court case that has to do with share ownership squabbles, with nary a mention of Linux.

I keep asking for support, and you keep pretending that you've provided it. Yet no lawsuits, firings, or bans intentionally related to Linux usage can be found.

Sad.

The one that immediately springs to mind is the various id software court cases. but there are a lot of them, as mentioned in https://www.gamespot.com/artic...

basically they do everything they can to subvert linux developement, its one of the reasons they have only 3 titles on android vs 10 on ios, when android destoys ios for graphics subsystems.

• Fortnite (Switch) online free. Sources:
• Gamespot
• Polygon
• Express UK

I'm willing to bet Epic makes more money off skins than they would if they received a portion of the Nintendo Online subscription proceeds.

Facts tend to be on "conservative" side, or more specifically on the side that isn't crazed puritans who just can't handle other people having fun in a way they don't approve of:

https://www.gamespot.com/artic...

Which nowadays is predominantly the far left progressive movement, who's activists carry the moniker SJWs.

> While there is a lot of tactics and strategy to work out, a huge part of a game like this is simply the ability to click on and order units about as fast as possible

= Short Answer =

TL:DR; False. Even 19,000 APM won't save you.

= Long Answer =

First off, a few terms so those that are't familiar with StarCraft aren't completely lost:

* APM = Acronym for Actions Per Minute. How fast you can click.
* micro -- ability to control your units individually (i.e. tactical positioning of units taking advantage of how many "game frames" they take to execute rotations and moves, along with taking advantage of speed and range of units)
* macro -- ability to produce units and keep all of your production buildings busy
* multitasking -- how well you can do both, and adapt to new strategy

Short term, someone with superior micro will destroy someone with better macro.
Long term, someone with better macro will destroy someone with better micro.

How well you can balance micro and macro IS what the game is about.

> Is there something I don't understand about the game here?

Yes. You are under the assumption that ALL you need to do win is have a high APM, which is false. While there is SOME truth to -- better players have a higher APM -- it ISN'T an absolute.

i.e. Spam clicking can get you up to ~400 APM. That doesn't mean you are efficient at micro and macro -- only that you can click like crazy.

The 2nd TL:DR; High APM doesn't tell me how good your macro is!

Correlation != Causation. A high APM suggests you are a better player; it does NOT guarantee it.

During the lifetime of a game your APM can and will vary. From the link above:

You can play the first 5 minutes of the game with perfect macro with 20 APM, then progress to 150APM by mid to end game and avg it out as 50

Another part of the problem is that APM has no standardized calculation; ergo some players use eAPM -- effective Actions Per Minute -- instead, which drop redundant commands

For example:

S...1...2...X

If a unit starts at 'S' and the user clicks on the sequence 1, 2,X -- that is 3 clicks -- where the first two are redundant. Does that mean they have a high APM? Technically yes, BUT the eAPM is closer to the "actual" APM.

The differences between low vs high APM has been debated for ages. There are:

* Bad players with low APM -- we don't care about these
* Bad players with high APM -- proof #1 that APM isn't as important as Strategy
* Good players with high APM
* Good players with low APM -- proof #2 that APM isn't as important as Strategy.

If you have two good players who can balance micro/macro then you'll see some VERY interesting, evenly matched games. The APM is only an indicator of potential problems.

> A computer could very obviously do this faster than any human unless it was artificially limited.

You are forgetting that all the "hard" AIs in RTS games typically cheat in 2 ways:

* They can see the entire map (doesn't have "for of war" -- it knows instantly where your base is without scouting)
* They are given more starting resources and/or can harvest resources faster

In Starcraft 2, Elite AI often has like 300 - 500 APM. With the HOTS (Heart of the Swarm) expansion Blizzard replaced the "Insane" with "Elite AI". The old AI is a che

Who is going to do the clamping?

This guy, of course.

pc gaming market is not a significant computer market anymore, it used to make up some 90% of computing equipment and software sales, now i doubt it makes up more than 1%. consoles (xbox, ps4, nintentdo) and mobile devices are where all the developers are.

A situation that has also been blamed for the decrease in the relevance of the PC platform as a whole. Not much point in buying a new PC if all you do with it is web surf, watch videos, and do your taxes on it once a year. That in turn has led to a decline in R&D for PC hardware. Which has caught up to the manufactuers, and is starting to bite into the dedicated video game hardware market.

Most games developers are then using a compatability layer which targets all platforms and which are unlikely to devote any reasonable dev resources to anything windows specific. even hololens is struggling to find developers and that is an order of magnitude more usefull than raytracing.

I agree, see comment above. When the publishers decide to settle for "good enough", we start seeing drops in inovation and increases in cookie cutter titles with a slightly different paint job. There's practically no support for optimizing or taking advantage of new hardware in gaming anymore. All of the publishers want maximum market penetration, and that means the games have to be avaiable on every possible platform and play the exact same way. Hell, even in house developers have issues, remember the release of the Nintendo 2DS and how it triggered the removal of puzzle mechinaics from Zelda A Link Between Worlds? Crap like Windows only APIs will do nothing but ensure the feature is never even considered for use in the current market. If they really wanted to get use, NVIDIA would have been better off trying to integrate with either the OpenGL or Vulkan APIs, at least then they may have had a chance with real time raytracing.

That said, it is a requirement for good vr (since bumpmaps dont work).
However, euclideon are the current leaders of that pack.

I don't think so. Considering most VR software has the graphical impact of chibi design, I don't think raytracing is going to give you enough of a better image to justify it's implementation. Nevermind that VR requires the absolute latest and greatest in video card hardware just to display period, and the initial buy in cost alone will prohibit new sales for a while. Now, if we could get raytraced big heads from something like Unreal Tournament in VR, that might get sales moving again, but that still seems to be a ways off.

Next, contract a new Fable title

Sure, why not?

https://www.gamespot.com/artic...

Of course, Windows bricks AMD systems now. https://www.gamespot.com/artic...

Back on PS2 Sony worked with Square to allow
cross platform play with PC for FFXI, 360 had the game too but MS refused to link up and stayed off by themselves.

Because of that FFXIV did not come to Xbox platforms

PS3 Sony partnered with Valve to bring cross platform multiplayer, chat, achievements, etc allowing Steam to work across PS3 and PC. Again MS refused.

Gearbox wanted Borderlands 2 to work across all platforms, and here is what MS had to say via Kotaku:

"Here's a Microsoft spokesperson saying "no," while promoting how awesome the Xbox 360's online service is: "Xbox Live delivers the best entertainment experience unmatched by anyone else, with 35 million actively engaged members. We have a high level of expectation for our game developers to ensure that all Live experiences remain top notch. Because we can't guarantee this level of quality, or control the player experience on other consoles or gaming networks, we currently do not open our network to games that allow this cross-over capability.""

Now this generation, Sony helped launch Rocket Cars as a free download on PSN and it had cross platform play with PC. Same with Street Fighter V

So is it really any wonder now that MS is playing runner up that Sony got fed up of this fair weather crap and gave MS the very same excuse that MS gave back in the day?

So why again is Sony getting shit for this?

2 models.

XBox 360, XBox 360 Elite, XBox 360 Arcade, XBox 360 S [250/4/320]GB models, XBox 360 Pro, XBox 360 Super Elite, XBox 360 Core. The Arcade has 256MB or 512MB of on-board memory; some models don't handle HDMI; and the low-storage models have to read from disc which, for some games, takes a minute or two to load large sets of assets instead of 10-15 seconds from hard drive.

That's the console's fault? If you want better performance, the power requirement is higher.

The Switch eats under 20 watts. The Wii U eats under 10 watts at full load. The Playstation 3 uses 170+ watts to play a movie. All of these consoles had the same resolution output and FPS within their generation as competitors. The Nintendo consoles tend to be more Japanese-centric, and target less photorealism via the use of brighter colors; that's not to say they haven't gone that route on the Wii U, although Playstation 3 titles used more-detailed textures instead of largely-airbrushed stuff. The production difference to accomplish the same visual style is minor; the technical capability is close, although the PS3 will be able to do more real-time lighting and shader effects than the Wii U, among other things.

What's left is basically gameplay. The games work on either console; one just works while eating a shitload of electricity. Some consoles overheat to the point of backing out their GPUs.

Try turning it off.

You mean unplugging it? "Off" on modern consoles means "talk to the Internet to get alerts and updates, and install things in the background." Even the damned Switch consumes 9 watts when powered off. The Wii U consumes 0.4 watts while off; the XBox One consumes 12.9W; the XBox 360 (Wii U generation) consumed nearly 3 watts. That means the XBox One actually consumes more power than a Wii U under full load when the console is "turned off"; and Nintendo decided this was okay with the Switch since nobody complained to Sony and Microsoft.

From stated specs and leaked presentation info it looks like Scorpio will be struggling to output today's games at 4k, I think potential buyers will be disappointed in the difference between MS's PR and what the system can realistically output.

After people complained this generation's consoles were underpowered for 1080p output I don't know why they are repeating this for 4k and also saying it will carry a premium price tag.

At that point, since Xbox games will be on PC anyway, why not skip Scorpio and get a 1080 or 1080 Ti and also have access to Steam as well?

It likely isn't a conspiracy theory. Nvidia seems to do something like this with graphics drivers and old video cards. Where AMD equivalents weren't suffering the same generational loss even with newer drivers. In many cases the AMD cards improve more even further in the cards lifetime. Ex: A 670 is approx to a 7950-7980. Today with the newest drivers it struggles to hold against a 7750, where that same 7950 in some cases is at the level of a 680.

What??

There's no doubt that linux game support has improved, but they're still a tiny minority. This is the list of 2016's best selling games in the US:

Call of Duty: Infinite Warfare
Battlefield 1
The Division
NBA 2K17
Madden NFL 17
Grand Theft Auto V
Overwatch
Call of Duty: Black Ops III
FIFA 17
Final Fantasy XV

Guess how many have linux ports?

make money in your spare time selling Grit

Did you look at the link? This is confirmed. http://www.gamespot.com/articl...

Why would MS cut off their legs? Scorpio will have an install base of 0 until end of 2017, PS4 and Xbox One will have at least 100m combined by then (about 80m now combined). Why would devs give a system that will have such a low ownership for such a short time before the next real generation the money and resources required to significantly improve games?

Scorpio software will be hamstrung by mandatory compatibility with Xbox One hardware. http://www.gamespot.com/articl...

Except for VR experiences, the PS4 Pro has the same issue except it's worse because the VR titles have to work on the PS4 as well which is much less powerful. Since the architectures are effectively PC ones writing separate shaders and scaling back polygon counts is not a big deal, it's done in PC gaming to target millions of different configurations, developers can easily handle targeting just 2 configurations.

Scorpio's higher price will slow adoption, developers will still focus on the much larger install base of PS4 and Xbox One onwers, meaning developer resources won't be put into significant enhancements for Scorpio compatible games. http://www.gamespot.com/articl...

The same as the PS4 Pro, except again that VR is exempt so the VR experiences on Scorpio will be far better than PSVR. Of course we have PSVR right now as opposed to XBox not having it at all at the moment so that is advantageous.

Scorpio's hardware will be outclassed 2 years later when the PS5 is released. http://www.gamezone.com/news/a...

Can you give us the specifications of both? No of course you cant so it is exactly as likely that some Scorpio Mk2 will be released at the same time as the PS5 and outclass it, or maybe that wont happen, there is no evidence either way so if you are making any kind of blanket statement like yours then you are an idiot.

It will be an expensive flop, not a good way to start a new generation.

A slashdot prediction of the future success of technology? On that alone I would be betting on Scorpio.

Scorpio software will be hamstrung by mandatory compatibility with Xbox One hardware. http://www.gamespot.com/articl...

Except for VR experiences, the PS4 Pro has the same issue except it's worse because the VR titles have to work on the PS4 as well which is much less powerful. Since the architectures are effectively PC ones writing separate shaders and scaling back polygon counts is not a big deal, it's done in PC gaming to target millions of different configurations, developers can easily handle targeting just 2 configurations.

Scorpio's higher price will slow adoption, developers will still focus on the much larger install base of PS4 and Xbox One onwers, meaning developer resources won't be put into significant enhancements for Scorpio compatible games. http://www.gamespot.com/articl...

The same as the PS4 Pro, except again that VR is exempt so the VR experiences on Scorpio will be far better than PSVR. Of course we have PSVR right now as opposed to XBox not having it at all at the moment so that is advantageous.

Scorpio's hardware will be outclassed 2 years later when the PS5 is released. http://www.gamezone.com/news/a...

Can you give us the specifications of both? No of course you cant so it is exactly as likely that some Scorpio Mk2 will be released at the same time as the PS5 and outclass it, or maybe that wont happen, there is no evidence either way so if you are making any kind of blanket statement like yours then you are an idiot.

It will be an expensive flop, not a good way to start a new generation.

A slashdot prediction of the future success of technology? On that alone I would be betting on Scorpio.

Scorpio software will be hamstrung by mandatory compatibility with Xbox One hardware. http://www.gamespot.com/articl...

Scorpio's higher price will slow adoption, developers will still focus on the much larger install base of PS4 and Xbox One onwers, meaning developer resources won't be put into significant enhancements for Scorpio compatible games. http://www.gamespot.com/articl...

Scorpio's hardware will be outclassed 2 years later when the PS5 is released. http://www.gamezone.com/news/a...

It will be an expensive flop, not a good way to start a new generation.

Scorpio software will be hamstrung by mandatory compatibility with Xbox One hardware. http://www.gamespot.com/articl...

Scorpio's higher price will slow adoption, developers will still focus on the much larger install base of PS4 and Xbox One onwers, meaning developer resources won't be put into significant enhancements for Scorpio compatible games. http://www.gamespot.com/articl...

Scorpio's hardware will be outclassed 2 years later when the PS5 is released. http://www.gamezone.com/news/a...

It will be an expensive flop, not a good way to start a new generation.

Scorpio, an upgraded Xbox One, is said to have about 3x the power of the PS4, 1.5x the power of the PS4 Pro. And 5x the power of the Xbox One, which it has to be compatible with. Scorpio software must run adequately on the Xbox One despite the huge power gap.
This is a premium system with a rumored high price tag, launching about 2 years before the expected next generation of consoles debuts.

Having to compete with the installed base of PS4 and Xbox One so late in the game, developer focus is expected to reflect this, leading to only minor updates to games such as higher resolution, framerate, and anti aliasing. Not expected are more complex models, more detailed worlds, significant shader and texture differences, increased complexity in physics models, or AI differences (especially since Scorpio gamers are expected to match with Xbox One gamers online, and the games are supposed to remain basically the same, only superficially different).

Bottom line is they expect knowledgable gamers (casuals won't care about this) to pay a high price for minor cosmetic differences not long before newer powerful machines come out that aren't resterained by compatibility with older less powerful systems. It doesn't seem like this will do much to bolster the Xbox brand, and may even make adopters upset. Probably only Microsoft's own titles will bother to put the resources behind making any significant improvements to games, especially considering how much games already cost, and how much testing will have to be done specifically for a significantly different version, and that's only 2-3 games a year?

It does not seem like Scorpio will help MS....

http://www.ign.com/wikis/best-... says their game of the year is Witcher 3

http://www.gamespot.com/articl... also says Witcher 3 and shows an image with a woman wearing clothing that is selectively revealing.
So what is this game you are talking about again?

I assume the same way Samsung infringed on Apple's patents:

http://static5.gamespot.com/up...

You should have chosen another example for a discrete GPU. GTX 970 has a very significant issue with the upper 0.5 GB of memory; using it causes a significant performance drop. See this story for an explanation and for nVIDIA admitting they messed up.

But that's not to contradict the general point you were making.

no PS4 will output a 4K game although the PS4pro will upscale

The PS4 Pro isn't just going to upscale. If the games are developed for native 4K then the Pro is "supposed" to have the capability to display them. That being said, Sony is not making it a requirement on developers. Some older games are only getting an upgrade to 1440p, some are just getting higher framerates at 1080p, some are getting other non-resolution enhancements, and some are not getting any upgrades at all.

Gamespot has a list tracking the titles that are getting an upgrade (or not).

In principle, I do agree but you do have to remember that commercial game development is a business so the developers target the platform that will give them the most return. In the case of the PS4 and PS4pro (out 10th Nov 2016) a developer would have to be arrogant or have a poor business sense to produce a game that would only run well on a PS4pro. What most developers would do is develop a PS4 game that would run well and allow for PS4pro enhancements.

I have played the Doom demo and while I am no fan of FPS games I actually enjoyed playing this game especially since it runs at 1080p and 60fps. What was important here was the 60fps part since you are moving very quickly and while the graphics are really nice you don't really have the time to enjoy the scenery.

I also play Bloodborne and while the framerate is supposed to be about 30fps on occasion you do get slowdown especially with multiple enemies on screen at once, however this game can be played at a much slower pace than Doom (except for encounters which normally have one to four enemies) and you can enjoy the scenery. Another game that is only 30fps is The Witcher 3 and IMHO it's the scenery that is more important as well as the story than the frame rate although like I have said before many dips in frame rate can be offputting although this does not happen that often in the TW3.

I won't deny having a solid frame rate is very important and preferably 60fps or higher or at the least a locked 30fps but you also have to consider your display device as well and then you have to consider refresh rates (in Hertz), screen resolution and latency it's all a question of integration.

Personally, I would like a larger 4K screen for my PC and PS4 setup. As a compromise, my wife gets the HDTV although if she is not using it I can move my PS4 and connect in less than a minute. What is interesting is I have an IPS monitor and the colors are incredibly vivid and it will display 1080p at 60ftps quite nicely so I am taking my time deciding on when I will get a 4K monitor. Actually, if I leave it too long (3 to 5 years) I may end up getting an 8K monitor instead and by that time the PS5 will be making its appearance.

no PS4 will output a 4K game although the PS4pro will upscale

The PS4 Pro isn't just going to upscale. If the games are developed for native 4K then the Pro is "supposed" to have the capability to display them. That being said, Sony is not making it a requirement on developers. Some older games are only getting an upgrade to 1440p, some are just getting higher framerates at 1080p, some are getting other non-resolution enhancements, and some are not getting any upgrades at all.

Gamespot has a list tracking the titles that are getting an upgrade (or not).

Indeed. Yet in others it wouldn't have stopped a thing. Remember this game is a quite colossal fuck-up. I wouldn't say reviews would have saved a person money as much as saying that even reviews couldn't save the producer of this game.

Reviewers let a lot of bullshit slide through. This is the exception not the norm.

I mean the game has tanked. It could quite possibly the worst tank since E.T. People are refunding where they can. Others are bending refund policies to prevent backlash...

3.5/5 stars TrustedReviews
64% PC Gamer
7/10 "good" Gamespot
4/5 stars Stuff.TV

To the credit of some review sites they've stopped publishing numbers or stars. Still these were the first 4 that came up in my google results which produced actual ratings or numbers for the review. Looks like a good game maybe I should go out and.... no *slap* *thud*.

The Wii used inaccurate software emulation

How do you know Nintendo's forthcoming $60 console doesn't also "use inaccurate software emulation"? Until it ships, nobody will have opened it up to look (except for parties to Nintendo's non-disclosure agreement).

and allow people to buy games for a $1 or $2

and didn't have access to the entire NES library.

Not all third-party publishers of NES games are willing to "allow people to buy games for a $1 or $2". When Nintendo announced Virtual Console for the first time, it mentioned Tetris as one of the games it probably wouldn't be able to license at fair market value.* Or for those third-party games whose copyright owner is unwilling, are you recommending that Nintendo lobby national governments to just take a license under eminent domain?

The Wii did not have a NES controller.

The controller bundled with Nintendo's forthcoming $60 console is compatible with Wii.

* Not counting Tetris Party on WiiWare, which was years later, twice as expensive as NES VC games, and broken in the same way as most other Tetris games since 2001.

Microsoft has launched many new features of Windows. Some survive, some don't (SideShow, Gadgets to name a few). "effectively telling developers" isn't the same as "actually telling developers" which is required for malfeasance. It is also not mutually exclusive. It doesn't say "if you're a game studio and developing for Windows, we are not going to let you run your program on our OS unless you make it compatible with UWP." They're also not curtailing users' freedom, though I admit I don't even know what he means by that. Not every piece of software installed on your PC will take advantage of all features of the OS. Why would my game need to manage my drive encryption or be able to set my desktop background? Heck, some don't even care if they're network enabled.

Basically, the statements quoted, to me, do not stand up to the idea of proof. Game studios could go right on doing what they're doing and say nuts to UWP. Besides, after just a shred of thought and research, these criticisms of UWP and any technical limitations that discourage development of PC Games in UWP, Microsoft has already responded to.

http://www.gamespot.com/articl...

http://arstechnica.com/gaming/...

The claim being made is that Microsoft will actively alter Windows so as to make alternate deployment platforms like Steam substandard and behave erratically. We are fully within our right to ask for proof of that activity being done. Besides, it seems like we're back to the age old Slashdot problem of reporting on old news.

http://www.gamespot.com/articl...

Clickbait from 2014.

http://www.fool.com/investing/...

Clickbait that claims that the Fire TV/mobile is a competitor to the PS4/Xbox.

http://www.cnet.com/news/xbox-...

This one is about Windows apps on Xbox, and has nothing to do with your premise.

http://news.softpedia.com/news...

Clickbait from 2009, which means the "last generation" they were referring to was the 360 and PS3!

Sony is talking about no future playstations.

I've seen nothing of the sort, citation needed from SCEfoo themselves.

And as to ease of use... learn to use a computer or render yourself too incompetent to participate in the modern world.

I run Linux so by my standards, you windows using gamer dudebros are the incompetents who shouldn't even be trusted to admin their own computer.

The level of competence required to manage a gaming PC is within the easy reach of a ten year old child. If that's too much for you... then that can only be pitied.

The masses simply can't be trusted to admin their own machines well. They don't have the time, knowledge or inclination. Said people should not be gaming on PC's....at all. They probably shouldn't even be using PC's for web browsing or media consumption.

Again, I run Linux, so NEVER pull that "console gamers are dumb" shit with me.

http://www.gamespot.com/articl...

http://www.fool.com/investing/...

http://www.cnet.com/news/xbox-...!

http://news.softpedia.com/news...

The writing is on the wall. MS is talking about making the Xbox effectively a gaming PC with a console formfactor. Sony is talking about no future playstations. The industry is moved on.

The entire console system doesn't make sense. Its more expensive... period. In every way. The quality that you get is generally a lot less. Compatibility is less. And as to ease of use... learn to use a computer or render yourself too incompetent to participate in the modern world. The level of competence required to manage a gaming PC is within the easy reach of a ten year old child. If that's too much for you... then that can only be pitied.

I hate to bust your bubble here but Microsoft only has mainstream support for Windows 8 (8.1 is a service pack) as well as Windows 10. Take a look here and Win 8 is only mainstream supported till January 9, 2018 which is not that far away. Sure you can get extended support for Vista, Win 7 and even Win 8 but you will be paying for that.

Actually, you're the one who has it wrong. Microsoft preempted the original Windows 8 release with the 8.1 release. They no longer support 8.0 and the 8.1, Update 1 release is the one being supported through 2023.

Think of if like Windows 98 vs 98SE.

I will concede that Microsoft only support 8.1 (which is a service pack for 8.0), however mainstream support for 8.1 is January 9, 2018 (as per the Microsoft web site). I did not explain it properly however I did provide the URL for the Microsoft support information site. Even if you still had MS Win 8 you can still get a free upgrade to 8.1 see here so even though I was technically wrong in stating Win 8 was mainstream supported till January 9, 2018 there is no associated cost with upgrading to Win 8.1 and getting free "mainstream support" at least until January 9, 2018.

There are two types of support Microsoft provides for their operating systems, they are "mainstream support" which is free while "extended support" requires you to pay for it and somehow I doubt most home PC users would pay for this service.

I hate to bust your bubble here but Microsoft only has mainstream support for Windows 8 (8.1 is a service pack) as well as Windows 10. Take a look here and Win 8 is only mainstream supported till January 9, 2018 which is not that far away. Sure you can get extended support for Vista, Win 7 and even Win 8 but you will be paying for that.

Actually, you're the one who has it wrong. Microsoft preempted the original Windows 8 release with the 8.1 release. They no longer support 8.0 and the 8.1, Update 1 release is the one being supported through 2023.

Think of if like Windows 98 vs 98SE.

For the current generation of consoles, the PS4 has sold over 35 million consoles, the Xbox One is over 19 million, and the Wii U is at 12.8 million.

And PC is at 200 million.

As for handhelds, how far is PlayStation Vita behind Nintendo 3DS again?

Which would be awesome for the industry if people bought games for all of them, but... they don't.

For the current generation of consoles, the PS4 has sold over 35 million consoles, the Xbox One is over 19 million, and the Wii U is at 12.8 million.

And PC is at 200 million.

As for handhelds, how far is PlayStation Vita behind Nintendo 3DS again?

Apparently not:
PS2 in 2000: $299
PS4 in 2015: $399
$399 in the year 2015 equals $285 in the year 2000

http://www.gamespot.com/forums...
http://www.falloutfacts.com/ot...
(Doesn't say NV is better: http://forums.steampowered.com...)
https://www.reddit.com/r/Fallo...

So on so on. Google has the links.

Not this generation.

At launch, it was losing money

A year later it was still losing money.

Only in 2014 did they stop losing money.

They sold 2/3 of the consoles before they stopped losing money. Therefore, the console lost money over it's lifetime (before you count game sales).

because the hardware was actually leagues ahead of pc's at the time. By allot.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/...
"Retail availability
NA November 15, 2001[2]
JP February 22, 2002
AUS March 14, 2002
EU March 14, 2002"
"CPU Custom 733 MHz Intel Pentium III "Coppermine-based" processor"
"Memory 64 MB of DDR SDRAM @ 200 MHz"
"Graphics 233 MHz nVidia NV2A"

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/...
"The second version, codenamed Coppermine (Intel product code: 80526), was released on October 25, 1999, running at 500, 533, 550, 600, 650, 667, 700, and 733 MHz. From December 1999 to May 2000, Intel released Pentium IIIs running at speeds of 750, 800, 850, 866, 900, 933 and 1000 MHz (1 GHz)."

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/...
"Performance is similar to the GeForce 3 Ti500 desktop GPU"
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/...
"The GeForce 3 (NV20) is the third generation of NVIDIA's GeForce graphics processing units. Introduced in March 2001"

So no, it had the graphics performance of the then high-end Geforce 3 Ti500 graphics card and a two year old Pentium III processor and 64 MB of RAM which was quite little.

So what you really ...
http://www.gamespot.com/articl...
"by Sam Parker on April 23, 2001"
"The GeForce3 was initially expected to cost $500 to $550, but its new suggested price is $399"
http://www.gamespot.com/articl...
"The Xbox will be launched in North America on November 8, 2001, with a retail price of $299" ... really got was a computer like complete gaming console which at most cost as much as only the graphics card in it would had cost separately.

It wasn't ahead of the PC, it "was a PC", but it was a cheap PC.

because the hardware was actually leagues ahead of pc's at the time. By allot.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/...
"Retail availability
NA November 15, 2001[2]
JP February 22, 2002
AUS March 14, 2002
EU March 14, 2002"
"CPU Custom 733 MHz Intel Pentium III "Coppermine-based" processor"
"Memory 64 MB of DDR SDRAM @ 200 MHz"
"Graphics 233 MHz nVidia NV2A"

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/...
"The second version, codenamed Coppermine (Intel product code: 80526), was released on October 25, 1999, running at 500, 533, 550, 600, 650, 667, 700, and 733 MHz. From December 1999 to May 2000, Intel released Pentium IIIs running at speeds of 750, 800, 850, 866, 900, 933 and 1000 MHz (1 GHz)."

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/...
"Performance is similar to the GeForce 3 Ti500 desktop GPU"
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/...
"The GeForce 3 (NV20) is the third generation of NVIDIA's GeForce graphics processing units. Introduced in March 2001"

So no, it had the graphics performance of the then high-end Geforce 3 Ti500 graphics card and a two year old Pentium III processor and 64 MB of RAM which was quite little.

So what you really ...
http://www.gamespot.com/articl...
"by Sam Parker on April 23, 2001"
"The GeForce3 was initially expected to cost $500 to $550, but its new suggested price is $399"
http://www.gamespot.com/articl...
"The Xbox will be launched in North America on November 8, 2001, with a retail price of $299" ... really got was a computer like complete gaming console which at most cost as much as only the graphics card in it would had cost separately.

It wasn't ahead of the PC, it "was a PC", but it was a cheap PC.

For those still running windows, and not Chrome OS, Mac, Linux or BSD consider this...an intervention on behalf of the slashdot community. im sure you have some immediate concerns -- reasons perhaps -- that you cannot part with your abuser. ill try my best to assuage your fears.

The Linux evangelist arrives at your door unbidden like the Seventh-Day Adventists. But shy a tenth of the humility or respect for their hosts.

1. But I use windows for gaming! Steam has more than 200 titles that run just fine in Linux.

and 6,000 games that run just fine under Windows. Steam Reaches 6,000 Games [August 2015]

2 I need it for office documents.
3. well its what my office uses so...

LibreOffice is the stand-alone office suite of the 'nineties, which not much to offer in terms of extensions, templates, and other resources.

MS Office is one component of an office system that scales to an enterprise of any size --- and it remains the gold standard for clerical work. Third party support and integration with other core business applications is excellent.

4. $os_name is hard. it doesn do $feature. its hard because learning new things requires effort. that other OS might not do exactly what windows does, but it still accomplishes the same tasks you need it to do in a different way.

The truth is that damn near everything of interest in FOSS/Linux is ported to Windows or begins as a native Windows app. That has never been true the other way around. The Windows user is task-oriented not OS oriented and that is something the geek never seems to understand. Windows does it all.

Windows does not respect you or your work. It insults your intelligence and flagrantly ignores your privacy. it sacrifices your productivity and needs for its own. the things it shows you and teaches you arent always things you set out to do or want from the OS, but theyre things the OS wants from you.

What I want from an OS is that it be responsive to the needs of a non-technical, non-specialist user. For that to happen, the OS must communicate with its developers in ways that I cannot. I set certain limits, but I don' get the shakes when I hear the word "telemetry."

In 20 years as a home user. I have made perhaps a half-dozen calls to MS technical support. I haven't had he slightest concern about my "productivity" when running Windows 10.

http://comicvine.gamespot.com/...

It's not currently possible to play pirated PS4 games.

The PS4's security does appear to have been at least partially compromised, however. A recent video appears to show Linux running on a PS4, along with a version of Pokemon. Note that we don't yet have independent verification of this, so there's a chance (albeit probably a slim one given the track record of the group in question) that this is a hoax.

It's still a long way from being able to play pirated games, although it is certainly a first step on that road. More to the point, however, it is even further from being able to make full use of pirated games, given the extent to which the full functionality of many PS4 games is tied to online features. History (e.g. the situation with the Xbox 360) suggests that console manufacturers are pretty good, over time, at detecting consoles running pirated software when they connect to online services and locking them out of said services. A PS4 which can't access the PSN is not much of a PS4.

As for pirated games on the PS3, it was possible. Sort of. There was a specific firmware version which, if you didn't update past it, could be tricked into running pirated games (via a USB dongle, if I recall). However, you should note that firmware updates on the PS3 were mandatory both to use online services and to play games released after that firmware version was issued. So in other words, if you had an old PS3 you kept at the right firmware version and never tried to use it online, you could play pirated games which did not require a more recent firmware version. So it was of limited use for most people and was only ever really a proof of concept.

We're not talking about ads for Viagra, porn, or anything like that, but ads for apps.

First displaying some app advertisements is a nice slippery slope to later transform it to a vehicle delivering all sorts of advertisements.

None of this should come as a surprise. This is precisely what happened with the Xbox 360 dashboard, and, by extension, the Xbox One dashboard. And it's exactly why I refuse to purchase an Xbox One, despite owning an Xbox 360 (which is actually a solid gaming platform), ditched Windows 10 for FreeBSD, and used my legit Windows 7 license to turn my one remaining Windows box into a video game console/streaming box.

The thing that Microsoft doesn't seem to understand (actually, I'm sure that they understand this very well) is that my electronic devices are for my own use. They're not a platform to shove ads in my face.

First off, games that are optimized for pure eye candy strain current cards, yes. But you don't have to have teh bezt pozzible grafix for everything. Take Alien: Isolation - looked really good, but ran at excellent framerates even on older cards. And even has some vr support. Tradeoffs can be made to crank framerate, and not horrible tradeoffs. I can handle 2010 graphics on VR, it's not like those games looked bad.

And no, a $4000 PC isn't necessary. The official specs are more like $1K these days. In fact, definitely $1K.

And no, 120fps/eye isn't necessary. You need low latency, definitely, but not that low. The DK2 peaks at 76fps, and yet few people report sickness at that rate.

1) Deepfreeze.it: http://www.deepfreeze.it/ does a great job of digging into and revealing the ties, 'backscratching' and outright corruption behind most of the gaming journalists on the big sites.

2) http://www.gamespot.com/forums... or at least the general question: "Gaming 'journalist' - seriously? It's a multibillion-dollar industry, and yet most of the "journalists" are freaks sitting in mom's basement desperately trying to pretend they're the next Perez Hilton, and who are tickled if someone even mentions they exist. None of them have the credibility of even the shammiest movie review shill.

The only console that makes any sense is the Nintendo products.

The PS4 and the XboxOne are just limited PCs. There's no reason to own one besides caving to corporate hostage taking techniques and ignorance.

http://static1.gamespot.com/up...

http://i.imgur.com/7ezaq7w.png

PC devs are notoriously lazy and incompetent by console-dev standards and prone to underestimate console audiences.

Some of the games are made by the same studios. Some quick googling shows launch day patches for both consoles and titles. Witcher 3 day one patch, Halo Collection 20gb launch day patch. Evolve, GTAV the same thing... so this reeks of a No True Scotsman falacy with "good developers", as if the developers run the show. It's a business that's all about cranking titles out as fast as possible while papering over with hype. Just for the record what are some developers that you consider good? Constraints: They can't develop for the PC and can't have any launch day patches.

There are these things called external music players like WMP, itunes, Winamp, etc etc. And also things like Spotify. Sure you'd miss out on whatever intros to songs, public service announcements, and news whatever Three Dog/Mr. Vegas analog in F4 will do, but you could have all the music you want.

Or perhaps they can just allow players to play their files through the game? "Oh you like music? Just turn on your radio!" This was a feature request, not a half baked community suggestion request to be answered by someone's mom.

Ah, naivete. Any time I feel like humans are smart, I just come here and read, and I'm cured.

Just skimming through your post, I see that you've incorrectly assumed the following:
1) That those illegal downloads represented lost sales. Haven't the RIAA and MPAA taught you anything about the faultiness of that logic?

2) That the people torrenting the software were potential customers to begin with. When it comes to B2B software, which is what is being discussed here, there are established channels for procuring demos or trials of software. You don't torrent it unless you never had any plans to be a customer.

3) That a competitor even existed. Small software niches, like the one being described, oftentimes only have one player, since the space is too small to support multiple competitors. With a $50,000 per seat price for software developed by a small company, it wouldn't be surprising if they were the only player in that space.

4) That the crippling of pirated copies results in any sort of meaningful backlash. If the recent examples of pirated games being crippled are anything to go by, people are finding them "hilarious", rather than being upset.

5) That pirates of B2B software complain about the quality of the software. If you just got done pirating a $50,000 copy of software, which is what is being discussed here, the last thing you'd do is trumpet the fact that you've done so by complaining about it to anyone at all. In the case of games, these sorts of techniques are being used to get pirates to out themselves.