Will we ever have the PERFECT console launch in the next 20 years

Since the 32/64bit era every console launch seems to be a bit of a damp squib with some issue of sorts so for my perfect launch this is what i would like

1.Be a reasonable price current consoles at 400+ euro at launch that is a bit to much especially when you do not get games with it.

2.Well made reliable good looking  hardware. So consoles that have small enough form factor does not get to hot and make much noise. I would also like the choice for discs as either tray loading or top loading, And of course the joypad being comfortable and well designed

3. GAMES possible the most important thing now many consoles have perhaps 2 or 3 good games but i do not want just that i want 10 or more i would much rather be spoilt for choice and also for varying genres so it covers all tastes

4.Backwards compatibility it would have been really nice to have xbox one to play 360 or even original xbox games and the ps4 to play ps1/2/3 games would have made things a lot neater but what irks me more is i believe they did not do it so they can sell you the games later on. Have to say kudos for nintendo for the wii-u running wii games (would have been nice if it could play game cube though)

There are just a few things i would like to see

Microsoft buying mojang....a good idea yes the price nooo

Ok over 2 billion that is a lot of money with that they could created several gaming studios and create some great triple A games and god knows how many lower budget games.

But to buy a studio that while has created one of the successful games ever does not have a track record yet and the rumor that the creator markus persson will not stay after is not a really good sign.

Thing is for the xbox one microsoft need the exclusives (as do the other consoles) and i believe they need to spend there money wisely

I always thought they would have bought double helix and iron galaxy that while more niche would have just been part setting up there own studios the rumor was that amazon probably spent less then 100 million on double helix

For both the xbox one, ps4 and slightly less so the wii u there is a bit of a gaming drought each company has a stack load of IP's but just not the games released.

The way i see it they should hire the right people and set up studios and get them stuck into developing the games. Buying studios is well and good but make sure they have a track record first

Why i hardly play multi player

I do play the odd game now and then but usually i do not. The last big multiplayer i did put a lot of time into was world of warcraft

Which i did enjoy but thinking about it the actual game play is not that good. If you took the game play mechanics and put it into a single player game it would not be that fun at all. As it rely's and has been designed on the multiplayer component. Also the enjoyment is based on the connection you have and the people you play with (taking the mick out newer people calling them noob's etc does not help)

But i think with a lot of games such as the call of duty series/Destiny and many others they concentrate so much on the online aspect that it takes away from the single player. Now EVERYONE can play single player and only a certain percentage can play multiplayer so i would have always thought get the single player done to a high level and then do the multiplayer

Now granted no matter how good the single player system is the multiplayer will last longer but i just do not want the single player as a after thought.

You know when you are playing games to much when in real life......

1. You look at the ground and think great textures there

2. Seeing a lamp post and think the lighting effects are good

3. See a shadowed area and think "stealth"

4. See the corner of a building and think cover and peeking around the corner

5. Watching boxing/UFC and when they land series of punches your mind pops up COMBO

6. Temptation to break a vase or a box as you think LOOT

Does always online for games affect you ?

I have been a gamer for many years and till about  early 2005 i was still stuck in the 56k era with the joys of trying to install half life 2 (which took many hours to download from steam) but then praise be i finally got broadband it was not perfect but i could play games like world of warcraft and play other games online.

But in the past few years i have noticed a trend with games having to be online even for single player. Now my problem is while  having to have a reliable stable constant connection which mine is not so some games are unplayable for a period of time but also you have to rely on another company's servers being reliable and often you will get downtime

I will always say single player games should be given the offline option even if meant perhaps just logging in once a week as "drm" but you will get people who do not have the broadband connection so games they can never play.

Will retro gaming die out ?

So i can pick up a snes or a megadrive and any game and play it . Now though not only do you have physical but also digital release and even in the previous gen it had caused problems for example on xbox live doom was removed (though added later on) but the game outrun was permanently removed due to licensing. And it got me thinking some games may never become retro servers will eventually be switched off and games will be removed.

But it is not only digital only games but physical media as well  let us for example say in 10 years i fancy playing skyrim on the xbox 360 i can put in the disc and play the game but it had a lot of major bugs but if the servers are down i cannot patch it so while i can play it is not the best it could be
.
With games becoming more and more reliant on being online (such as diablo 3) even for single player there is a danger that in many years some of the games i play now i would not be able to play then.

i really hope they come up with ways so i can always play the games i love and at there best

Galaxy 4 review

Thought i would keep this short

First the good

+Excellent screen very good for watching movies my other half even commented looks better then watching stuff on her monitor on the pc
+Hardware performance is pretty good
+Excellent camera great quality and does good HD video
+Little touches like the finger hovering to preview and using the forward camera to see if you are looking at the screen so the screen does not switch off and it has loads of stuff like this .
+The look of the device is pretty cool
+Voice quality is good

Now the bad

-Battery life now don't get me wrong its not that bad (and certainly better then my old phone) but i think they could have put in a 3000 mh+ battery in like the note 2
-Performance is good for the most part but can get a stuttering
-Back cover a cheap plastic considering the amount you have to pay for it would have expected a bit more
-16gb of storage supposedly but can only access around 9gb of it
-Heat when using the phone for games and video it can get quite hot

So overall a good phone not worth upgrading a s3 for though but my old phone was only a galaxy ace so it was a massive step up

One thing that does puzzle me there are two version of it one with a quad core and the other with a octocore .Now from what i can gather its not really a octocore its more two quad cores one lot does the intensive work and when your just surfing the web then the second lot take other as its lower power>But surely a intelligent quad core would be better instead that perhaps turns off cores or reduces clock speed if needed ?