EnVy_CaLiBeR

What a debut by the Wyatt family and that was a pretty good Raw overall.

I agree actually.

Agreed. Too bad the thing is still $500 dollars, requires Kinect, and still is weaker than the PS4. It might look attractive after a price drop and a Halo release. Until then, I'll be content with my PS4 at launch.

Agreed. The damage has already been done after that huge backlash.

Xbox 180 confirmed. Microsoft has officially pulled their policies as far as used games, mandatory internet connection, and region locks. http://www.ign.com/articles/2013/06/19/microsoft-reversing-xbox-one-internet-used-game-policies Outside of the mandatory Kinect and $100 more for inferior hardware, everything is back on an even playing field.

Wow! What an awesome moment and twist from Mark Henry. I was initially sold on that retirement.

Christian and RVD comes back. Nice.

Shame on me.

Is Destiny set to come this year?

Gamestop wants $100 down which is what I did but places like Best Buy and Toys R Us only want $25 and $20 respectively. Also, Amazon doesn't charge until the item is actually shipped so you wouldn't pay that price until the PS4 releases.

Just pre-ordered my PS4 yesterday with Killzone: Shadow fall.

That perception came from the Wii (in that case, it was true) but it hardly applies to their other systems. Also, people never treat Nintendo consoles as their main systems because of the lack of third-party support that Playstation and the Xbox receive. However, Nintendo remains in the console race due to how popular all of their franchises are which is why their systems thrive nearly completely on first-party support. Even if one were to consider everything they do as gimmicks, Sony and Microsoft sure does pay attention to what Nintendo does. The motion-control gimmick that Nintendo started (or made relevant) has Microsoft basing their next-gen system around the Kinect and Sony pushing the Move more. The tablet controller on the Wii U has Sony making Playstation Vita remote-play a necessity so that all PS4 games can be played off of the screen. The PSP had remote-play as well but Sony is being far more aggressive in pushing the feature now and there's no doubt in my mind it's in response to Nintendo.

It's one thing to say that Nintendo's games just don't appeal to you anymore and that you don't like how some of their games don't have a story aspect to them. It's another to try and argue their relevancy as a video game company. Their first party games sell like hotcakes because they are quality titles and once again, are still some of the best games in the business. Mario barely has a story but you'd be hard pressed to find many platforming games that surpass it. Same with Zelda and the action-adventure genre. They change their formulas enough to keep fans coming for more and their games are usually top-notch. I'm not even a huge Nintendo guy but even I can recognize this. Both of the other big console manufacturers clearly understand their relevancy. Motion-controlled gaming with the Wii lead Microsoft and Sony to both follow suit and create the Playstation Move and Kinect (which both are still pushing with the next-gen consoles). The main reason people say Nintendo sold out to the casual gamers was because they went with the motion-control with the Wii so doesn't that mean the other companies sold out as well for following? Also, Sony has drew inspirations from a number of Nintendo games and tried to recreate them as exclusives under their branding. Their relevance as a video game company is well established. I can understand wanting more stories out of their games and being burnt out on them, though.

That's one reason why. Nintendo's first party games are still some of the best in the industry. That's why they're relevant.

Sony just trolled Microsoft beyond belief.

Stick a fork in the Xbox One. Sony just announced that there are NO restrictions on used games and what you can do with a game after you buy it on the PS4. Also, no 24 hour check-ins.

Right. This is arguably worse than the PS3 being at that price. The PS3 was ahead of its time when it launched hardware wise with Blu-Ray being new technology when it released. That's not even counting the fact that you didn't have to pay for online with the PS3 and there wasn't any DRM. The Xbox does very little that I can't do already on other devices. Also, it won't even be the most powerful console when it releases. Microsoft sent this console out to die.

LMAO. $500? The used games restrictions already made it a no buy but $500 at launch? Did they not learn from Sony and the PS3? That's not even counting the fact that you STILL have to pay for Xbox Live.

Watch Dogs will be on the 360.

The X1 uses Blu-Ray, making the forced installs potentially even more disappointing depending on the size of the games. That 500 GB hard drive may start looking mighty small after awhile.

Same here. This anti-consumer approach will not bold well for Microsoft if it is indeed the only console manufacturer to implement the practice (Still don't know if Sony does this some capacity). As others have said, the only way this doesn't backfire on Microsoft is if game prices come down significantly and/or there are huge sales similar to Steam and I doubt that happens honestly (with games getting more expensive to make) and at that point I'd rather go PC altogether anyway. Bottom line: Handcuffing your consumer as to what they can do when exploring purchasing options and what they can do with a game after they buy it is demonstrating that the product isn't for the consumer that enjoys freedom with products they buy (and I don't know not one person who doesn't like freedom with how they obtain the stuff that they buy). Even if you never planned on buying a used game, borrowing, and/or letting your friend borrow a game of yours, this practice doesn't even give you the option to do so and it's something gamers have been allowed to do on consoles for as long as I remember. Taking that away from the consumer will not bode well for Microsoft especially if it's the only manufacturer that does it and it's looking like it will be.

Doesn't matter. The fact that the "major features" are features that add very little if anything at all to gaming is a problem. At the end of the day, the system is supposed to be a gaming console. The extra stuff is cool, but there's a great chance that anybody in the market for brand new console already has technology in their house that does the majority (if not all) of the X1's features that they showed today better than it can do them. So what does that leave you with? Very little. Sony's PS4 conference at the very least demonstrated features that could be beneficial to gamers (even if it's not for everyone) on top of showing some games for it. Even the features that they showed that could benefit gamers wasn't very impressive. Waiting for E3 is fine, but this reveal leaves much to be desired for core gamer.

It's technically a fee; You're paying for the full retail price of the game according to the Vice President of Microsoft, Phil Harrison. http://www.technobuffalo.com/2013/05/21/xbox-one-fee-for-buying-used-games-full-retail-price/ You can play the game over your friend's house by using your Xbox Live Account but if you wanted to borrow a game or buy a used game from Gamestop, you;ll have to have your friend's Xbox Live Account information or you have to pay the full $60. Wow. Just wow.

Also, the Xbox One will not function without the Kinect attached. Forcing a pointless gimmick down consumers throats? Microsoft failed big time.

Nintendo's 1st party titles still remain as some of the best in the industry. The Wii U isn't where it needs to be yet but the 3DS is a prime example of a system offering many quality games with tons more coming. It's not the 90s where you couldn't find mature titles on a Nintendo platform anymore.