![rafimama:
shortformblog:
wired:
We got an EXCLUUUUUSIVE first-hand look at the brand-spakin’-new Xbox One.
GO CHECK IT OUTTTTTTTT.
(deleted some interim comments to not give too big a wall of text)
… [E]ven multiplayer matches that can grow to 64, even 128 participants, rather than the usual limit of 16 or 32.
Welcome to 2002. Battlefield 1942 could host 64 players on one map (if I wanted to be really snarky, I would pull out Gemstone III or Neverwinter Nights or UO or Meridian 59).
I’ll admit, the entertainment system / streaming aspects look intriguing. But not enough that I’d shell out paper on this thing.
Overall, though, I’m very underwhelmed. It has the horsepower of a middle-of-the-road gaming PC, and all the vendor-lockin you’d ever want.
I’ll stick to playing fun games on Steam Big Picture, rather than shelling out $80 for a not-so-fun-but-cost-orders-of-magnitude-more-to-develop game on this hunk of dissapoint.](http://25.media.tumblr.com/53e3d997ff393606dde7b7da5f9e5e47/tumblr_mn5tlpTjTm1r69k7do1_500.jpg)
We got an EXCLUUUUUSIVE first-hand look at the brand-spakin’-new Xbox One.
(deleted some interim comments to not give too big a wall of text)
… [E]ven multiplayer matches that can grow to 64, even 128 participants, rather than the usual limit of 16 or 32.
Welcome to 2002. Battlefield 1942 could host 64 players on one map (if I wanted to be really snarky, I would pull out Gemstone III or Neverwinter Nights or UO or Meridian 59).
I’ll admit, the entertainment system / streaming aspects look intriguing. But not enough that I’d shell out paper on this thing.
Overall, though, I’m very underwhelmed. It has the horsepower of a middle-of-the-road gaming PC, and all the vendor-lockin you’d ever want.
I’ll stick to playing fun games on Steam Big Picture, rather than shelling out $80 for a not-so-fun-but-cost-orders-of-magnitude-more-to-develop game on this hunk of dissapoint.
(Source: Wired)
