Play station 4 or Xbox one

[Xbox]

Everyone in Canada now has a data cap unless you pay for unlimited but most providers still cap the unlimited plans anyways.

Bell has true unlimited internet. I think they are the only ISP in Canada that offers this right now. That or they cap it at a number so high that it's unreachable.

Everyone in my house uses Netflix and we've never had any issues.

[Offensive Threat]

Bell has true unlimited internet. I think they are the only ISP in Canada that offers this right now. That or they cap it at a number so high that it's unreachable.

Everyone in my house uses Netflix and we've never had any issues.

The cap from every provider is pretty much theoretical. Very few people ever get charged for overages. We use Shaw and have 7 people in our house all using comps and TVs and wi-fi constantly with Netflix on somewhere usually. Never been charged for going over which I expect we do every month, probably by a lot. or sent one of those "hey, be carefull your using too much" letters

[Xbox]

The cap from every provider is pretty much theoretical. Very few people ever get charged for overages. We use Shaw and have 7 people in our house all using comps and TVs and wi-fi constantly with Netflix on somewhere usually. Never been charged for going over which I expect we do every month, probably by a lot. or sent one of those "hey, be carefull your using too much" letters

Well in the East we don't have Shaw or Telus home services (I think, or they're extremely unpopular) so I can't comment on them but I know Rogers won't hesitate to charge anyone if they go over. Even by the slightest amount, Rogers will charge you for it. Maybe the other 3 are more forgiving, but if you go over your monthly plan with Rogers, expect to pay for it. Some of my friends have had this happen to them.

[DollarAndADream]

Bell has true unlimited internet. I think they are the only ISP in Canada that offers this right now. That or they cap it at a number so high that it's unreachable.

Everyone in my house uses Netflix and we've never had any issues.

I use Shaw and everyone in my house uses Netflix too, with no issues.

I download movies and TV shows all the time. So does my brother.

We've never had any kind of warning.

[Xbox]

I use Shaw and everyone in my house uses Netflix too, with no issues.

I download movies and TV shows all the time. So does my brother.

We've never had any kind of warning.

Fair enough. From experience I know Rogers isn't like Bell or Shaw when it comes to leniency from using too much data.

[BeefcakeBo]

I use Shaw and everyone in my house uses Netflix too, with no issues.

I download movies and TV shows all the time. So does my brother.

We've never had any kind of warning.

Currently the way the service providers have it set up is that the "Unlimited Plans" are actually not reachable within your Upload and Download Bandwidth. The number of machines you have doesn't really affect anything because your up and down band with is a capped off at your modem. So in theory if you ran the maximum up and down you couldn't reach the limit. However in the future they will lower the limits, and people's up and down bandwidths will be greatly increased making it possible to go over.

[peaches5]

Eh, the games part is fully opinion based. I couldn't care for Desert Storm, P Gotham, Halo or Crimson Skies. I play Counter Strike on my PC.

PS2 had all the titles I wanted like MGS, God of War, the Final Fantasies, Shadow of the Colossus, and many more.

MGS sadly becoming terrible is your opinion. MGS4 was an amazing game for me, and playing Ground Zeroes I know that The Phantom Pain is going to be stellar as well. They veered off with the Raiden game, but that wasn't for the main MGS audience. They were widening their audience with a hack and slash game.

If you think PS3 only had Naughty Dog then you are missing out. For me, Xbox360 had basically nothing. I had no interest in any exclusive title. For the ones that were only 360/PC I got them on PC.

MGS2 was meh and MGS3 was total shit. I played God of war when it first came out and its nothing special I prefered Prince of Persia the Final Fantasy games have been awful I was a huge FF growing up and what its become is laughable; 10 was the last decent FF.

As far as Desert Storm it was an example how when 2 games were on both systems then Xbox version of the game was better.

The PS3 is a terrible gaming system pretty much the only reason people bought them was because Sony made Bluray players so damn expensive. I mean literally who would buy a Bluray player for 500 bucks when you can buy a Ps3 that plays Blurays for the same price.

Halo, Gears of War and Forza are more than enough reasons to own an Xbox on top of the fact that all online games you know had Xbox Live that was so far superior than Sony's online network its not even funny its just pathetic.

I will agree that the xbox one has pretty much nothing I am not happy about Naughty Dog going back to Uncharted that series is done and should stay done and they should work on new things like they did with Last of Us. Microsoft biggest mistake is not letting Halo die they could have Destiny right now if they would of just let Bungie make something new and for all platforms.

[DollarAndADream]

MGS2 was meh and MGS3 was total crap. I played God of war when it first came out and its nothing special I prefered Prince of Persia the Final Fantasy games have been awful I was a huge FF growing up and what its become is laughable; 10 was the last decent FF.

As far as Desert Storm it was an example how when 2 games were on both systems then Xbox version of the game was better.

The PS3 is a terrible gaming system pretty much the only reason people bought them was because Sony made Bluray players so damn expensive. I mean literally who would buy a Bluray player for 500 bucks when you can buy a Ps3 that plays Blurays for the same price.

Halo, Gears of War and Forza are more than enough reasons to own an Xbox on top of the fact that all online games you know had Xbox Live that was so far superior than Sony's online network its not even funny its just pathetic.

I will agree that the xbox one has pretty much nothing I am not happy about Naughty Dog going back to Uncharted that series is done and should stay done and they should work on new things like they did with Last of Us. Microsoft biggest mistake is not letting Halo die they could have Destiny right now if they would of just let Bungie make something new and for all platforms.

MGS3 was my favourite one of the entire series. So I strongly disagree with you there.

I've always liked God of War over Prince of Persia, but lately neither of those series' interest me. Whatever God of War comes out for PS4 should be great, but Ascension was a big step down. God of War 3 was amazing.

You're right about FF, 10 was great. I've recently been playing the HD Remaster actually. 13 was crap, but 15 should be good as it seems they are going back to what it should be.

It's funny, as FF15(previously named 13-Versus) was one of the reasons I bought a PS3 when PS3 was coming out. That game is still not released.

I wouldn't call it a terrible gaming system. Entirely your opinion. I've gamed on it for years and have had a 360 as well. Preferred the PS3.

Uncharted is true. I thought it was over. The story of Nathan Drake is over though, as they are going with a new protagonist. Should be a little interesting, but the series capped off everything already so I'm not sure what to expect.

I wish they'd take another direction like they did with The Last of Us, so I agree with you there.

[Offensive Threat]

We have a PS3 cuzz our friends have PS3's. I do my gaming on the PC but the kids like it in the living room. Its worked flawlessly since day one 6? years ago now so cant complain about the machine. In a year or so we will prob get a PS4, or Xbox one if that what everyone gets. Dont care about the fanboys, just want something that works and they can play with their friends on it. Game pricing is getting out of hand though. I buy my PC games on steam sales for under $10 usually. Guess Im spoiled that way.

In my opinion being able to play with and against your friends is far more important than which system you get and which titles are available. So you get what your friends get. It boils down to who buys first. Whatever they get we will probably all end up getting. Except the guy who bought the WiiU. Hes boned.

[The Ghost of Tom Joad]

The XBone will be cheaper than PS4 shortly. It will be sold for $400. MS has abandoned the Kinect in order to undercut the PS4 price, just as industry insiders predicted months ago. Interestingly, about 10% of the XBone output power was dedicated to the Kinect functions, so hypothetically, by ditching the Kinect, they've freed up an additional 10%, which can be used now to close the resolution gap with the PS4.

From a consumer POV: I would choose XBone because it will be cheaper and they are clearly in 2nd place right now in the console war. That means they will work tirelessly to close that gap. MS will pour a lot of money into game exclusives or whatever to the make the XBone more desirable.

From a gamer's POV: I would choose the PS4 because Sony just has a better stable of exclusives, and more variety too, but this is a personal choice-- there's really no wrong answer. All of the big games I played on the last-gen were multi-platform, so in terms of gaming I had little to lose (only the Halo series) and everything to gain.

Aesthetic POV: PS4 is compact and beautiful, the XBone is massive and hideous. But looks aren't everything, and it's what on the inside that really matters.

From a hardware POV: I would resoundingly choose the PS4, especially now that MS has dropped Kinect. I don't consider XBone a next-gen console, period. As we inch towards 4K resolution, the XBone is still struggling to produce games with a resolution greater than 720p. That's no better than last-gen. Cross-platform games are consistently running at a lower resolution and/or frame rate on the XBone than on the PS4.

From an online gaming POV: I have never played online with the PS4 so I can't comment, but LIVE is a superb product, and all reviews indicate it is the superior product. So by default, it's the XBone here.


Side concerns:
I worry about the XBone because there seems to be no direction for the product from the executives. Most of the people responsible for developing this console have been terminated or they have left, largely due to the fact that it had such a negative reception at the previous E3. Think about how much the product has changed since that E3 when it was first announced? Not small changes either; we're talking major changes to the hardware of the console. And now, Kinect is being ditched. Many of these changes are leaving behind consumers who have already committed to their product. For example: What happens to people who have Kinect already? Will there still be firmware updates and full game support going forward?

Meanwhile at Sony, there seems be a silent, but massive exodus taking place. Many of the key figures in some of Sony's biggest in-house studios have left abruptly, and other studios have simply been shutdown because of budget cuts. Some insiders have suggested the departures are due to the fact that Sony is forcing "Project Morpheus" integration for all their exclusives, and feeling is that the product is just not that good at this stage. Furthermore, Sony as a brand is haemorrhaging money; in fact, the only part of the company that is not in the red (as is my understanding) is the gaming division. These kinds of losses tend to have a trickle down effect into all aspects of the company. Will this make Sony reticent to invest the money needed to support PS4?

Long story short: Get the console you really want. What game exclusives do you want play and what consoles are your friends going to buy/already bought?
Or flip a coin, and call heads or tails in the air. Then catch the coin, and before you look at what side comes up as, stop and think, which side are you hoping it will be? Then you will know what your heart desires.

[Sedins 55]

I think I'm going to go with Xbox one because most of my friends have it, and it's getting cheaper and I don't really care about Kinec. Once again thanks for the responses, really helped me decide.

[Xbox]

I think I'm going to go with Xbox one because most of my friends have it, and it's getting cheaper and I don't really care about Kinec. Once again thanks for the responses, really helped me decide.

Good choice because playing with friends is extremely important. All of my buds who play games decided to all get the same console this gen, and that was X1. It's fun being able to play with everyone, that's for sure. It's a great system too. Coming from some who played both: The graphics and resolution are the exact same. Microsoft uses a very high quality upscaler that IMO makes some games look better than Native 1080p because of the colour filter in it. It also supports 4K upscaling, so 1080p upscaling is a piece of cake. With DX12 and the last reserved space in the GPU being given to devs, the multiplats will have the same specs down the line.

Also DollarAndADream made a great point about games. I'm on the flip side though. Halo and Gears of War are my 2 favourite franchises of all time, and I can't just not play those games. He hates them but to each their own. I never got into the big PS exclusives. Absolutely hated Uncharted (I was devastated when they announced there going with Uncharted 4), didn't like Resistance, God of War, or Final Fantasy and I didn't like Infamous. Metal Gear was alright but MGS5 is on Xbox One. However, The Last of Us was unreal. The story line and ending was absolutely brilliant. Borrowed my friends PS3 for that one game.

As for the PS2vGCvXBOX debate, I think PS2 easily had the best line-up. Ratchet and Clank, Jak and Daxter, War of the Monsters and the PS1 support for games like Crash, Spyro and Twisted Metal. Still play my PS2 today because older games are more challenging. I have 360 and Wii, and both are backwards compatible so whatever games I couldnt play on PS2, I have for those two (Halo 2, SSBM)

As for the online: I felt last gen XBL was vastly superior to PSN. XBL was miles more stable. You get what you pay for. This gen, PSN is drastically improved. I'd even say the quality of it matches XBL now. In my PS4 tenure, online was good and it wasn't the problem. They even get party chat now too. But XBL still has the edge because of the 300,000+ dedicated servers from Azure.

[DollarAndADream]

Good choice because playing with friends is extremely important. All of my buds who play games decided to all get the same console this gen, and that was X1. It's fun being able to play with everyone, that's for sure. It's a great system too. Coming from some who played both: The graphics and resolution are the exact same. Microsoft uses a very high quality upscaler that IMO makes some games look better than Native 1080p because of the colour filter in it. It also supports 4K upscaling, so 1080p upscaling is a piece of cake. With DX12 and the last reserved space in the GPU being given to devs, the multiplats will have the same specs down the line.

Also DollarAndADream made a great point about games. I'm on the flip side though. Halo and Gears of War are my 2 favourite franchises of all time, and I can't just not play those games. He hates them but to each their own. I never got into the big PS exclusives. Absolutely hated Uncharted (I was devastated when they announced there going with Uncharted 4), didn't like Resistance, God of War, or Final Fantasy and I didn't like Infamous. Metal Gear was alright but MGS5 is on Xbox One. However, The Last of Us was unreal. The story line and ending was absolutely brilliant. Borrowed my friends PS3 for that one game.

As for the PS2vGCvXBOX debate, I think PS2 easily had the best line-up. Ratchet and Clank, Jak and Daxter, War of the Monsters and the PS1 support for games like Crash, Spyro and Twisted Metal. Still play my PS2 today because older games are more challenging. I have 360 and Wii, and both are backwards compatible so whatever games I couldnt play on PS2, I have for those two (Halo 2, SSBM)

As for the online: I felt last gen XBL was vastly superior to PSN. XBL was miles more stable. You get what you pay for. This gen, PSN is drastically improved. I'd even say the quality of it matches XBL now. In my PS4 tenure, online was good and it wasn't the problem. They even get party chat now too. But XBL still has the edge because of the 300,000+ dedicated servers from Azure.

I would go as far as to say I hate them. They just don't interest me that much.

I've played plenty of Halo and Gears of War. To me they're just another addition to the FPS and shoot em up genre which is filled by itself.

It's kind of funny, I'm more into a game like Killzone, but everyone seems to not like that and prefer CoD or BF.

I can't even get into CoD's anymore. BF I'll play for awhile but it gets boring also.

Someone really needs to bring in an FPS game that's a game changer. I'm not talking Titanfall either. I've played it and stopped already.

[Xbox]

I would go as far as to say I hate them. They just don't interest me that much.

I've played plenty of Halo and Gears of War. To me they're just another addition to the FPS and shoot em up genre which is filled by itself.

It's kind of funny, I'm more into a game like Killzone, but everyone seems to not like that and prefer CoD or BF.

I can't even get into CoD's anymore. BF I'll play for awhile but it gets boring also.

Someone really needs to bring in an FPS game that's a game changer. I'm not talking Titanfall either. I've played it and stopped already.

Oh it's coming this September man, and it looks like a game changer. DESTINY!!

[Glory_Days]

If you like to play games online a lot, I would say go with whatever system you have friends on. Playing with randoms online, especially for some games can be tedious and annoying.

If online isn't your thing, I'd do what lot of ppl on here have suggested, wait for E3, see the line-ups of games for each console, and go from there.

I've owned all the Playstation consoles, and a psp...(ugh), enjoyed their exclusives a lot over the years. Recently though, some of their exclusives have grown kind of stale, for me anyways.

Longevity for the Playstation brand is a small concern for me as well, Sony is hemorrhaging massive amounts of money, and has been for several years. Obviously the Playstation brand is their flagship and if Sony continues to sink, they'll sell every other division to keep it afloat, but would have to imagine Playstation might take a hit as well, such as a few of their first party developers being shut down.

Meanwhile, Nintendo is flushed with a ridiculous amount of cash reserves, they can bomb the next 2 consoles and still be financially sound. Microsoft doesn't rely nearly as heavily on their X-Box division as does Sony on Playstaion.

Basically what I'm saying, is 5 years from now, if I buy a PS4, I don't want to be sitting in my living room with a controller in one hand, and my c*** in the other playing on a dying system.

[MJDDawg]

Oh it's coming this September man, and it looks like a game changer. DESTINY!!

I was just going to say this.

I'm hoping that Destiny is game changer. The other one I've had my eye on is Watch Dogs.

I'm really hoping that the "always on" online in these game work as planned.

[Xbox]

I was just going to say this.

I'm hoping that Destiny is game changer. The other one I've had my eye on is Watch Dogs.

I'm really hoping that the "always on" online in these game work as planned.

Yeah, at e3 I thought the always online functions in both games made a lot of sense. I am extremely excited for Watch Dogs now, and that's less than a week away. Do you know if theres any way to turn online off in that game? I know Destiny is purely always online because of the boss levels with player jump-in.

Destiny looks really cool though. It seems like an MMO Halo and Borderlands mix. From past experience, Bungie makes great games so I'm sure Destiny will be a game changer, they invested $500 Million in the game. The last game, GTA 5, set the record and it was ~$300 Million.

[MJDDawg]

Yeah, at e3 I thought the always online functions in both games made a lot of sense. I am extremely excited for Watch Dogs now, and that's less than a week away. Do you know if theres any way to turn online off in that game? I know Destiny is purely always online because of the boss levels with player jump-in.

Destiny looks really cool though. It seems like an MMO Halo and Borderlands mix. From past experience, Bungie makes great games so I'm sure Destiny will be a game changer, they invested $500 Million in the game. The last game, GTA 5, set the record and it was ~$300 Million.

Yeah, apparently it's just part of the menu. I was worried about being constantly hacked in a solo game, but you can turn it off any time.

http://www.digitaltrends.com/gaming/watch-dogs-players-can-invade-game-want/#!PhOpZ

When you are playing Ubisoft’s open world game Watch Dogs, merrily hacking your way across Chicago, you may come across other, real players that secretly jump into your game and attempt to steal data you’ve earned in order increase their own power when they return to their game. It’s a fairly aggressive form of multiplayer that could aggravate as much as titillate, but according to lead game designer Danny Belanger, this function can be turned off.

The multiplayer in Watch Dogs allows a player to join another’s ongoing solo campaign without the host knowing they are there. While the unwitting host is running around completing their campaign missions, the second player can surreptitiously track them down and siphon off data collected during the first’s game. They do so by hacking the phone of the host, and staying within a certain distance of the player while the hack is ongoing.

If the invader is successful, they can leave the host’s game and return to their own, then use the data to strengthen themselves while leaving the host weakened. Once the hack begins, the host is notified that they are being attacked, and they must kill the hacker, or get far enough away to break the connection.

For people that aren’t interested in multiplayer interaction through a game that is primarily single player, this could potentially be annoying to the point of infuriating. You may be playing your game and then face a random attack that you can’t control, forcing you to divert from your objective and deal with the menace. According to Belanger though, this function can mercifully be disabled from the menu.

“All the online activities are just part of the menu,” Belanger said during a live stream of Watch Dogs. “They’re a choice. But if someone is not into that … they can totally turn it off.”

The way the multiplayer is set up, you won’t be constantly attacked. There is a feature known as a “Shield,” which prevents you from being attacked multiple times in a row. Your own actions will also increase the likelihood of being attacked. The more you randomly attack others, the more likely you are to be attacked by other players in return.

Watch Dogs was recently confirmed for release on PC, PlayStation 3, PlayStation 4, Xbox 360, and Xbox One for May 27 – a Wii U version is also on the way, but a date has not yet been set for it. When it does arrive, the game will also feature a separate multiplayer mode that allows eight players to freely roam around Chicago and engage in various events.

I'm sure you've seen this but here's a nice explanation with the differing view points:

[Xbox]

Sweet thanks man, that really makes me feel better about the game! The anonymous hacking is cool, but could get very annoying if it was constant. I know NFS: Rivals was always online, but it gave the option to play single player only so you're not constantly pestered by trolls.

[Caboose]

It doesn't really matter as both will have laughably outdated hardware in 2-3 years.

Just get what your friends get, its the same crap.