Well, I suppose that makes some sense for some people. I want my games as FUN as possible...if that means less realism in some ways, that's what I want. I do know I'm an oddball, so I feel lucky that the entire gaming industry isn't going the hyper-realism direction.
As I said, this isn't really an issue for me as I don't use multiplayer or chat much if at all (or play sports games much). If I did, and this is not optional, it would upset me to find out about it after I bought the game and/or system. That's why this video is helpful no matter what you feel about it, it's informative (if only minimally).
It IS an issue for me that XB1 has an always on microphone/camera and an always on internet connection. For someone like me, that's just a door for intrusion with little to no benefit. (I expect to hear about them being hacked by an ex-boyfriend to spy on someone within 6 months.) That's the main reason I prefer PS4 so far, the microphone/camera is optional. I also don't need my game machine to be a full multimedia platform for all my video needs, which seems to be a main 'selling point' for XB1 that's lost on me.
(and I'm not just a PS fanboy, I have a 360 and ps3, but no camera/microphone on either)

Ahhh, but if we're going to use the 'would it happen in real life?' postulate, I would point out that he was commenting as if he were a commentator, not as a player, so why was one player/team penalized?
I don't know why that would be a decent reason for this kind of thing either, most games are NOT like real life in most ways, even this game has many elements in it that are completely unrealistic in order to make it a fun, playable game. If the Xbox1 is going for this kind of unrealistic realism across the board, I think I'll stick with my ps3. I play games for fun, not to allow the speech police in my home. (That said, I don't play online or use the microphone/speech feature, so this likely wouldn't ever happen to me).
I'm just guessing, but is this a feature of multiplayer meant to keep people from spouting obscenities in quasi-public arenas in order to limit customer exposure to unwanted cursing? That would actually be reasonable, especially if it can be turned off with the agreement of both players in an online game.

I get the idea that people want their friends on the same system, so they can play with/against one another. But the degree all sides get worked up is just odd. It's one of those cases of can't we just agree to disagree, but all sides get nearly evangelical.

My take... I prefer the 360 controller to the PS3 controller. I like the weight, the button and stick placements... just the whole feel is better, for me, at least for most games. Some 3rd person games benifit from the PS3 layout a bit better, but for shooters and platformers I think the 360 layout is better. Most of the exclusive titles next Gen are leaning me to the One, but most are cross platform, so that has little influence. For the current generation, I found the PS3 to be a far superior media machine, beyond the Blu-ray support, I think it does Netflix better (even discounting the poor UI the XBox had prior to the upcoming unified interface), which might be an issue with my router and it working better with the PS3 than the XBox, but even for connecting to my Windows PC and PlayOn (a program on my PC that allows me to use Hulu on the TV without Hulu Plus, and allows me to play more media types from my PC on the TV), it was better. However, the multiplayer on XBox seemed better, despite the fee... which gets me to a rub against the One, I wish Microsoft would remove the Gold requirement to access video services like Netflix, YouTube and the like. Leave the Gold requirement for multiplayer gaming, but video services should be broke off.

That said, most of my gaming is PC side... though for a game like Battlefield 4 or Titanfall I prefer a console... do in part to my lower end PC... yeah, the graphics on those games would look better (if my PC was a bit more modern), but I don't know, something about those style games makes me like the experience on the console better... same with Assassins Creed 4... actually, many console type games... but Steam and I love one another...

@radx / @RFlagg

Agree the difference is hard to notice if you're not directly comparing, and that building for cross-gen compatibility is probably a big limiting factor.

I'm almost a bit concerned (because I have AMD shares) that this will hit console sales once the initial pre-order fervour dies down. Not from these kind of comparisons but from in-store demos being underwhelming.

The 360/PS3 jump seemed much more noticeable. It might take 4K and widespread adoption of larger TVs, assuming the next-gen can even pump this out at 30 FPS, to really validate it. The fact that neither can do BF4 above 900p isn't exactly promising ...

It is an interesting comparison, but as RedSky notes, not really fair.

Part of the problem is the game is designed to work on the 360/PS3 as well as next gen systems/PCs, and that need will hold it back. Once they stop aiming at the 360/PS3 compatibility, it should improve a bunch, then another generation or two for them to really start optimizing things. Compare BF4 One/PS4 to BF6 or BF7 on One/PS4 and I'm sure we'll see improvements by then... and more noticeable jump from the 360/PS3.

My thoughts:

* For technology that is 8 years old, this is mighty impressive how small the difference is. It's worth looking back to see the 360/PS3 launch titles to see just how much has come from programming efficiency rather than raw processing power. It will be interesting to see if in 5 years, these new consoles will look equally miles better than they do now.

* Textures are sharper, particle effects like smoke and dust are snazzier and draw distance is greatly improved but ... on the whole, the lighting, most of the doodads in the environment, and the overall 'feel' is the same if you don't look too close.

* Sony's consoles seem to always display darker by default than MS's. I don't understand why for the purposes of comparison they can't pump up the brightness.

* With all the furore about Xbox One being 720p and PS4 being 900p (which doesn't sound too bad but is about 50% more pixels to the PS4), there doesn't seem to be a large diference in detail. If anything the environmental effects seem slightly better on the Xbox One.

In the end of the trailer there are only the logos of PS3 and 360, so i guess current gen

Add in the Delta 6 Gun Controller and you're all set.

I've also seen people using Omni+Oculus+Razer Hydra (kinda like a Wii-mote or PS3 Move controller, but also senses relative position from the base station)

I'm not sure what Microsoft has going for it at this point. The hardware is so similar between this and the PS4 that making an exclusive publishing deal seems like throwing away money opportunities for a publisher. Its not like how it was with the PS3 and 360 where the PS3 decided to take a radically different approach hardware wise. Microsoft is betting on all the other features stacked into it. They've been trying for over a decade to make a "unified household media center" and this might be their next attempt.

Every time some company does something arrogant. I keep thinking, "Oh good, they'll be punished, but at least they'll learn something so other people won't make that mistake again.

Sony was HEAVY with repeated arrogance with the PS3 with all the crazy shit they kept saying.

So you'd think somewhere someone wrote it down in their notes, "don't be arrogant cockbags and give people choices instead of taking them away" with the Sony debacle as a citation

but I guess not.

The current XBox allows you to borrow, rent games. You can buy and sell used games without any issues as well. The upcoming XBox One however allows a title to be resold only once through a very specific process that they haven't revealed yet. You can't borrow a friends copy of a game, and I'd presume you can't take your game to their house to play there unless the game is tied to your account not just your XBox One... Either way...

As Jinx noted, this was likely done to appease the publishers. They've been wanting to get rid of the used game industry for some time (an industry I don't get anyhow, you'll give me less than half the used price of a game, then sell it for $5 less than a new copy... why buy used if it is only $5 less?).

The question becomes, as noted before, if the publishers make it worth Microsoft's time and losses due to that policy then it will work out, but if they support Sony just as well, or even after a short delay, then Microsoft gambled wrong. They are going to lose sales over the policy. That, the fact the system needs to connect every 24 hours or it will lock down even single player use until it connects again...

To play games online with XBox Live you need a paid Gold account. You can play games on the PS3 without a PS Plus account, but there are rumors that the PS4 will require a paid PS Plus account to play multiplayer. That will just be leveling the playing field, and if you still don't need a paid account to access Netflix (you need a paid Gold account on XBox to get Netflix or Amazon videos... and I think to access your YouTube account fully) on the PS4 then they'll still have an edge on the multimedia front.

Another of Sony's big upsets was pricing the PS4 $100 under the XBox One price... now I'm going to hazard a guess they had a couple prices ready to roll based on the XBox's price and decided to undercut, it could have been the planed price from the start, but I'd guess they wanted to scare Microsoft. I'm also guessing Microsoft will announce "new cost saving measures" right before the holidays and adjust theirs down, they are already behind the 8 ball with the used and borrowing game limits, I can't see them letting Sony getting a huge boost from price as well... if they reverse course on borrowing/used games they might be able to keep the price up "we've heard the complaints from our users and have decided not to implement that feature at this time" sort of thing, but I'm guessing they are too far into that to reverse that and will just price match.

EDIT: I should note that I'm mostly a PC Gamer, followed by XBox games then PS3... well iOS games are probably after PC Games but before console games... I like XBox better as a gaming platform, but my PS3 has better networking for Netflix and Blu-ray support (XBox One gains Blu-ray support) so it is my multimedia machine of choice. I don't think I'll upgrade either system at this time though...

Funny? *comedy !

Let's hope Sony doesn't change its mind like they did with Linux on their PS3s!

As an owner of each console but a loyalist to Xbox...I've gotta hand it to Sony. We got owned this year. Looks like Microsoft is pulling a PS3.

Q4 is going to be a great time to buy a PS3 or 360. They may finally be cheap enough to justify given there's maybe 3 decent games between them that I can't play better on the PC.

Somewhere along the line, console makers forgot their purpose and destroyed their own market. Stop making half-assed computer games for your stupid consoles and make console games! Also, stop fucking up my computer games so they can be console-friendly!

I think it's the emphasis on everything but gaming that gets people bent out of shape. It is pretty ridiculous.
Even more so when you consider that Nintendo is the only one that is focusing on the games, and they've made such ridiculous design decisions that they're still not a guaranteed alternative. I really feel like Nintendo would sweep the market if they had dropped a console that was nothing but gaming, minus any external stupidity (i.e. with a rationally designed controller).
I work in the game industry, and I'm checking out of the next console generation. I wasn't eager to go in for the last one, and as it's finally rolling to an end I look back on a half-used Wii that overheats if I don't have a fan on it at all times, and having purchased two 360s and two PS3s because the first ones both failed in a year due to shit manufacturing.
I'm glad I'm still allowed to build my own PC.