AbsolutSurgen

Right price for the SeX. If the rumours are true, ridiculous price for the SSD upgrade.

@SlugThanks for doing this again! I know it takes a lot of effort/time.

Those motherfuckers think they are invincible in their masks.

Coronavirus: Social gatherings above six banned in England from 14 September

I'm not from Cali, so it's been no adjustment for me. The media's narrative has been that Vegas has had a great offseason -- dramatically upgraded the defence, and added playmakers to the offensive skill positions -- yet will still have a worse record than 2019. I don't see how both can be true.

Ontario halts reopening following spike in COVID-19 cases: 185 new cases as schools reopen across the province Fuck Brampton/Toronto/Ottawa.

Everything they can get in the market will sell in November/December. The question is how well it will sell next year (and beyond).

1) Agreed. I had try to say that in my post, but I may not have been as clear as I should have been 2) I paid $500 for mine. What would Avengers look like on an Xbox One that had a GPU 1/3 as powerful as it?

I really do think it's overpriced, and since I didn't explain myself earlier: 1) The SSD is too small for even a casual gamer Games may shrink initially due to not having to duplicate some assets, but games have ALWAYS gotten bigger -- and their is no reason to think that this trend will change. Once you provision 10% for wear management, and another chunk for system resources -- how much is this going to have available 420GB? Enough for about 5 AAA games. So, you're probably in for the base console PLUS a 1TB upgrade card (for whatever MS charges for it -- I'm guessing $100-$150). 2) The GPU won't deliver a reasonable experience for the entire GEN A 4TF GPU will probably give ~1080p (probably dropping to 720p on some titles) experience for next gen titles for 2-3 years (unless developers lower graphical settings). Once the inevitable mid-cycle refresh consoles appear, I think the games designed with those consoles in mind will result in SES games that are a very poor experience. (As an imperfect analogy, imagine gaming for the last 3 years on a hypothetical ~0.7TF Xbox One or PS4). If I were to give advice to a non-enthusiast gamer, I would tell them not to buy it. For me, $299 is too much for this experience. My advice to them would be to wait until 2021 and pickup whatever bundle/discounted holiday package comes out on Black Friday for PS5/SeX. About half of hardware console sales occur during November/December -- those holiday prices reflect what many/most people pay for. On the topic of how consoles are selling (NPD only reports total hardware, so this reflects combined Sony/MS/Nintendo). Hardware sales were down 20% in 2019 from 2018 (about 25% in November/December). Yes, during the shutdown console sales were very high (for obvious reasons) -- but before and after that wasn't the case (Jan & Feb 2020 were down 53% and 42% from 2018; Jun & Jul were down 45% and 23% from 2018). The reality that consoles were flying off the shelves at those prices (excluding the shutdown impact) just doesn't tie with reality.

You could buy a PS4 with God of War, TLoU and Horizon: Zero Dawn for $200 last Xmas. Unless MS is bundling this, or offering aggressive discounts at Xmas, it is a terrible value.

It has a GPU that will struggle to play games at playable framerates/resolution in a couple of years. When you are buying a console at launch, you should at least have a reasonable expectation of playing games throughout the gen. I don't think that will be the case here.

$299 seems awful high for a 4TF console.

Looking at the variability in the pre-season power rankings has me convinced that the media has no idea how this season will go.

That is very naieve. Epic has managed to do very well by giving their game away, and selling cosmetics. I am being very honest in saying that I have no idea what that sentence means. A price increase works when demand is elastic, which is probably the case with CoD -- but may not be with other games (like FIFA or Star Wars: Squadrons). EA didn't price SW:S below $60 because they thought the lower price would lower demand. Ubisoft is keeping the price of next-gen AC:V at $60, because they believe that increasing the price will hurt the overall revenue on THEIR game.

Base MSRP per game <> Revenue Revenue has very little impact on how much the employees at a game studio make, and even less on how temp workers are treated at AAA studios.

In for my 12-year old.

I'm a big boy, and can handle people with different opinions to myself -- particularly when they write polite/intelligent responses like you did. IMHO, Consoles have a long history of forcing customers to re-buy games to get the better version (even if it is a "HD remaster"). Offering next-gen/remastered/etc. versions for free has always been the exception not the rule. These expectations are somewhat different on PC -- and the reasons for this could be debated for pages. However, I believe I read an interview with Phil Spencer (don't have the link) indicating that they would not allow publishers to sell next gen upgrades for existing versions. (Also, my recollection was last gen publishers were selling "next-gen upgrade" DLC for $10.) The alternative, is, if you really want to replay the game, is wait another year and buy it on a Black Friday sale for 50% off. When a game isn't a big commercial success, like Control, and they have much lower revenue prospects going forward, they just can't afford to do the work and give it away for free. I'll be honest, after first hearing what kind of game The Avengers was going to be, I quickly dismissed it. And, after hearing about first impressions from the recent Beta, I decided to cross it off my list. IMHO, we as consumers have the opportunity to make informed buying decisions -- if we don't like the price of something, we shouldn't buy it until it is at a price/value proposition that we want. And on a tangent -- all "AAA" companies are set-up to drive profit (AKA corporate greed). They sell us DLC, try to convince us to pre-order games (knowing they will be on deep discount in 3-months) and sell premium versions (with useless cosmetic crap, soundtracks, cheap statues and stickers). Even Cyberpunk does this. As well, their strategy to give away the next-gen version for free makes good business sense. The worst thing that could happen to them (on console) is for enthusiasts to wait for the next-gen version to be available before buying. They want to lock in as many buyers at $60, right now, as they can. Sorry for the rambling response, I've been interrupted 10 times while writing it.

When it comes back in the Budget, I'm gonna struggle with what new monitor to get. With 2 "tween" boys, it is becoming quickly apparent we're going to need 2 gaming computers going forward -- and ASUS doesn't offer the 27" HDR1000 monitor in Canada (and I think the 43" may be just too big).

I think I made up the term. I believe Nvidia actually uses the term "G-Sync Display" (not using the term certification anywhere).

I was just making a flippant comment (given the amount of shit G-Sync certification gets). But, actually yes.

No. The expansion slots on the back of your case.