Tech Stocking Stuffers: 18 awesome gifts under $50

Anonymous Ubisoft source hints that The Division will be pushed back to 2015

By Russ Boswell · 18 replies
Jan 8, 2014
Post New Reply
  1. According to an anonymous source within Ubisoft's development ranks, Tom Clancy's The Division may not see a release until 2015. This is sad news for any of you anticipating the post-apocalyptic action title, which makes use of the brand new...

    Read more
  2. H3llion

    H3llion TechSpot Paladin Posts: 1,365   +278

    Nooo! I was really, really hoping for a 2014 release. Well, I guess if that is true then I will be putting away my console purchase until 2015. Hopefully by then you have the slims and just overall much improved consoles compared to day 1 releases (ie all the new ones atm).
  3. Teko03

    Teko03 TS Evangelist Posts: 397   +179

    This is hilarious. The Division and Watch Dogs are the only reason are planning to get a PS4 or XBox One. On a more positive note, the consoles bugs will be fixed and price will be lower by the time these guys release!
  4. Forg0t2

    Forg0t2 TS Booster Posts: 147   +25

    Yup. So all front row people who fought for getting their hands on one of the consoles are now feeling screwed... that's why I rather wait until the games actually worth playing are released.
    H3llion likes this.
  5. Burty117

    Burty117 TechSpot Chancellor Posts: 3,102   +870

    Are any of you PC gamers? Because I'm pretty sure both games have a PC version and The Division Developers have gone on record saying the PC version will be there best? Why on earth would anyone who already has a gaming PC buy a PS4 / Xbox One to play both games?
  6. Forg0t2

    Forg0t2 TS Booster Posts: 147   +25

    Some prefer to experience those games on console.
  7. Burty117

    Burty117 TechSpot Chancellor Posts: 3,102   +870

    Sometimes I just really don't understand :/ I can understand exclusives, but why on earth would you buy expensive hardware, pay more for the games themselves, when you already own everything to play the same game but in better quality?
  8. m4a4

    m4a4 TS Evangelist Posts: 925   +493

    As someone who appreciates quality, I'm perfectly fine with this. A bit disappointed, but fine.
  9. Forg0t2

    Forg0t2 TS Booster Posts: 147   +25

    Don't ask me. I want to play the Division on the PC because my community is set around PC gaming and not Console gaming...
  10. davislane1

    davislane1 TS Grand Inquisitor Posts: 4,731   +3,749

    I game on both and will occasionally buy a multiplatform title for console rather than PC. Why buy for a less versatile platform? Comfort and time, for me. Having a game run with the best possible textures at the highest possible resolution is less important to me than physical comfort while playing the game, and sitting in front of a PC or fiddling with a laptop are two of my least favorite activities. Secondly, and more importantly, games are a waste of time. PC generally has much more content (mods and other user-created content) than consoles, so purchasing for Playstation means I will spend less time playing/modifying games and more time being productive. Thus the price markups on hardware and software are offset by increased overall value.
  11. Burty117

    Burty117 TechSpot Chancellor Posts: 3,102   +870

    So when you are being "productive" on your computer you're incredibly uncomfortable? Ok...

    Edit: "Thus the price markups on hardware and software are offset by increased overall value."

    PC versions are cheaper, and as you said, have mods, so value sways to the PC? I'm utterly confused right now...
    Last edited: Jan 8, 2014
  12. davislane1

    davislane1 TS Grand Inquisitor Posts: 4,731   +3,749

    1. I said I don't like sitting at a computer, not that I was "incredibly uncomfortable." Moreover, productivity does not imply comfort.

    2. ValueContent - Price. With luxury goods, value is subjective and increases (decreases) proportional to the satisfaction it gives the consumer. For me, time wasted is weighted much heavier than hours of content per dollar and core gameplay is weighted much heavier than graphics. With 3 hours of free time, I'd rather spend 30min progressing through a decent-looking game and 2.5 hours progressing in something real than spending 3 hours exploring the most beautiful, content-filled game ever created. By gaming on a console, I give up graphics (which I don't generally care about) and content in return for less time wasted and the alleviation of some negative (boredom, for example) and wind up more satisfied. Ergo, the price markups are offset by an increase in value. Thrift is a component of value, but it is not the only variable in the equation.
    Last edited: Jan 8, 2014
  13. Burty117

    Burty117 TechSpot Chancellor Posts: 3,102   +870

    But they are the same game? Same content (unless you actually mod it) but you've paid considerably less? You can use the same controller as a console if you want and gameplay is the same on both? You can enjoy a PC game with any screen it plugs into and since it's a Ubisoft game you just download it from Steam or uPlay and just hit play? Sure, I guess you have that install time vs console which doesn't to an extent but still? Your Equation doesn't fully make sense?
  14. davislane1

    davislane1 TS Grand Inquisitor Posts: 4,731   +3,749

    The price difference on new titles is typically around $10. Not that big of a deal in my book. Additionally, I generally buy my games used in an average price range of $5 - $15, so price is, again, not the biggest variable in my value equation.

    Simplified version: Value = Subjective Benefits - (Subjective + Objective Costs). When dealing with luxury goods, Benefits and Costs are subjective and, therefore, what one person sees as a benefit (or cost) another might not. What's more, even if two people consider the same Benefits and Costs, they may assign them different values.

    My central point is that the value of a luxury good is not merely the amount or quality of stuff you get for your dollar (thrift), but a measure of the total satisfaction you can derive from the good. That satisfaction is not based on an objective cost/benefit reality, but on a subjective one. Quite literally, this means that something one person values another might not care about or even consider a negative (cost). The reason my previous posts appear nonsensical is because we are measuring our satisfaction potentials differently. I would buy The Division for PS4 and you would buy it for PC simply because our satisfaction is based on different things.

    Edit: Objective Costs is the money you lose as a result of buying and/or playing the game.
    Burty117 likes this.
  15. Burty117

    Burty117 TechSpot Chancellor Posts: 3,102   +870

    That now makes more sense, I understand where your coming from now, but I also think that's an absolute waste of money. Money has a set value, to everyone, Hence exchange rates, the price of items in individual countries vary, but for example, £1 has the same value to me, as it does to you (in this instance we'll pretend you live in the UK) Surely, if you can plug a controller into your PC, plug your PC into your TV, that is exactly what the PS4 would do but run better and all the other goodies PC has going for it? Just simply you would have spent £300 less?

    Now I understand your assigning the PS4 a great value to yourself personally, either, your so incredibly rich £410 is pocket change to you so the only Value you're looking at is the PS4 (I doubt this conclusion since you've put yourself down as a Student).

    Or you simply want a PS4 just because you want the latest and greatest and using the games mentioned in the article as a way of convincing yourself to buy one? Thus adding an emotional value which derives from simply, your personality?

    One more point of concern:
    This implies you haven't even given your current "goods" (aka PC) fair judgement, that is, you haven't even tried to play a game on your PC the same way you would a console to see if you like it or not, which would explain your unfair conclusion you would get more satisfaction from a console don't even own yet.
  16. davislane1

    davislane1 TS Grand Inquisitor Posts: 4,731   +3,749

    This is why I classified a game as a luxury good and included objective costs as a negative component of value. As you rightly observe about monetary price, X = X. However, whether or not that price accurately reflects value is dependent on the consumer, as we've discussed. An unrelated but apt example would be asset pricing. Give five analysts the information for XYZ company and you'll get five different valuations. Make the second mistake of asking them for investment advice and two guys will tell you to stay away because it's "overvalued," two will tell you it's a "great deal," and the oddball will tell you it's stock price is "about right."

    I've had only a fleeting interest in purchasing anything gaming related over the past year or so. To make a long story short, someone I know tried to challenge me with a wager and lost. Had that not occurred, I may very well be looking at the PC version of The Division instead of the PS4.

    No, I simply feel that it is too much hassle to properly set up my computer to play it like a console. I've done this from time to time with Skyrim and I do it with console emulators for obvious reasons. For multiplatform games, I feel it's more trouble than it's worth. I haven't failed to perform adequate analysis, I've simply reached a different conclusion. Subjectivity, my friend. :p
  17. Burty117

    Burty117 TechSpot Chancellor Posts: 3,102   +870

    Huh, really? You find spending 5 minutes just setting up a controller and plugging in a TV for the first time to be that bothersome you'd actually go buy a whole console instead? Well I guess if your friend lost a wager that changes everything :p

    Fair enough, just hurts all the logical parts of my brain hearing you say you'd buy a whole console just to save a bit of time xD
  18. davislane1

    davislane1 TS Grand Inquisitor Posts: 4,731   +3,749

    5 minutes setting things up, 5 minutes putting things back the way they were when I'm done, every single time. Alone, not enough to justify buying a console, but definitely one of the cons of certain PC situations. In fact, if I ever became so lazy as to spend $399 just so I didn't have to hook up a cable or operate a switch, I'd get a gun and shoot myself....Assuming I could find someone to pump it first :p
    Burty117 likes this.
  19. Jad Chaar

    Jad Chaar Elite Techno Geek Posts: 6,515   +974

    MS is releasing an updated Xbox One in Q1 2014 supposedly.

    I think this is a good move by Ubisoft. They probably saw Battlefield 4 and didnt want to release a buggy game but get it out on time.
  20. Blue Falcon

    Blue Falcon TS Addict Posts: 161   +51

    It costs a lot of money to develop next generation games from scratch. I probably made sense to delay the game to both polish it more and allow for the userbase of XB1/PS4 owners to grow. The developer may also need more time since a PC version is in the making. Oh well, less and less next generation games out on the horizon for 2014 means I can happily wait until 20nm Maxwell and skip NV's rumored 28nm GM204 mid-range altogether. More time to save for a faster GPU that's not going to be needed until these next gen games drop.

Similar Topics

Add your comment to this article

You need to be a member to leave a comment. Join thousands of tech enthusiasts and participate.
TechSpot Account You may also...