Oh! Oh! We've brought up Sony's security! :) Being a part of the infosec world, I could argue this both ways (which is why I usually don't bring it up).

I can argue that Sony getting hacked gives them a strong lesson on how to do it wrong. But, much like security in a house is improved right after a break-in, Sony's security may have improved to shore up those issues. Sometimes it takes a kick in the pants to spark some action rather than just wishful thinking.

On the flip side, though, a break-in like that and how they handled it probably indicates an endemic problem with security, monitoring, customer assurance, uptime, etc. So while they may have overcome that hurdle in the moment, they may just not have the talent or interest in investing further into security until something else happens. If the answer to "Why secure your sh!t" is "To avoid costly downtime for our customers," then your head is still in a slightly wrong place. (In other words, security incidents that don't involve downtime or otherwise are obvious to users are hushed up...)

Then again, most companies are the same way until they are either burned or have some strong internal interest in security as an advantage/need in their industry.


In the software world, Microsoft's Windows is a far more secure product for all the attacks and attention it gets. But Adobe's products (PDF junk) and even Oracle's Java are constantly attacked and patched but are no better for it, because of endemic corporate issues and lack of caring about security in the original products.

I didn't read the entire thread, sorry if I missed it.

Will the 300k servers host, instead of relying on the user with the least latency to host (eg, COD)?

If the bit about the servers doing more heavy lifting in general makes online matches faster/smoother/bigger, then Xbox one just for that.

Tapatalk ...

Microsoft Windows has been more secured, but it is still not "secure" because of some of their design decisions. But some of its rep as insecure is undeserved. Most attacked because most popular, as I'm sure you know.

But I don't have faith in any game console for security

Just pre-ordered my PS4/ Battlefield 4 edition for $499 and pre-ordered two more games.



Fvck Xbox. lol :stirthepot:

and firearms??? lol:tup:

Honestly with everything going on I'm still leaning towards the xbox. I had a PS3 at the same time up until the network was down for a month and I got hacked. They are new to the game when it comes to this part of the field. I personally can not trust that. It's like our cars would you want the proven mechanic or the guy that sounds good? Can Sony take over as the champ yes, do they have the qualifications yes, will they have the support to back it up is the question?

Sent with TapAhoe

Because they were easier to target. And then there was the time that the whole network was hacked. Then there was the time that everyone lost their game data and had everything reset that was saved.

Sent with TapAhoe

I've had my xbl account compromised before. Are you saying that doesn't happen?

No it does happen on xbox to. But they shut down my account, reimbursed me, and then some. On the PS3 they just said sorry pretty much just told me to grab the vaseline

Sent with TapAhoe

And before we get on the wrong foot these are my accounts of when I had one. I am considering the PS4 cause I do believe that you learn from your mistakes just at this moment I'm leaning towards the xbox. After they come out I kind of hope that Sony blows Microsoft or of the water so they can be knocked down a peg. Cause I will say this about Microsoft they are way out of range when it comes to putting the customer first.

As in prices for their services such as movie rentals and so on.

Sent with TapAhoe

I believe the reason why MS is expanding the servers so aggressively is not for Xbox Live. The big reason is the cloud computing. what many of you fail to realize is what do you need 300,000 of them for? Many of you are bringing up these poll times. MS isn't stupid and they realize this. Nearly the entire internet switches and routes at line speed. What does that mean? It means these routers can make a decision and route your traffic as fast as it can come in; likewise the switches. Having 300k servers allows them to strategically place them in major cities and provide adequate coverage around the world. 30ms timer to send data back and forth is plenty of time. Unfortunately, that basically guarantees games will stay at 30fps and not make the jump to 60fps. Just a little food for thought.

What does all that mean?

Sent with TapAhoe

Sony is not free anymore man!

Sorry if im sounding like a fanboy I do not think I am. Just discussing my points of why im choosing the Xbox One for online games. Please do not forget im getting both systems at launch. I will give a fair unbiased opinion on both as well.

The 300k servers will act as computing power and dedicated severs for almost all of the games. No more host migrating when the player host drops out :happydance:

There is no good reason to hack a console the way they are designed it is nearly impossible to plant a worm or virus. Even if they did nothing could be recovered that is of any use. All critical data is stored server side.

You are thinking to narrow minded, the 5Tflops is also theoretical which is how it has been advertised as far as I have seen. Time will tell how well the system does @ 4k at least the ability is there.

Yep my account got hacked and they took care of me. I could of had my account back the same day but I happened to be out of town on vacation so I told them to leave it locked out until I got home.

Bingo someone knows his stuff :tup:

Please do not get offended at the information I am posting, I promise as soon as I get numbers and server power from Sony I will be posting it here. I have no intent of being a fanboy and have tried discouraging any comments that lean that direction.

We all just want accurate details and as much information that can be gathered before launch. Lets keep it up! :tup:

I forgot to mention Sony (even though it was not immediate) did handle their security breach the correct way. Did it benefit the online community? No. In the large scope of the problem it was the best method they had and like others mentioned are even stronger now.

They also offered a very nice insurance policy (free of charge) to those effected. Only a handful of fraudulent activities were reported none of which were confirmed to be part of the incident.

Good info, thanks!

One thing I don't get is the fps limit.

Back when I would PC game, Q2 and counter strike I recall running Linux just to force sync my monitor refresh rate to 120hz and the graphics card to 120 fps. If you connected to a local fast dedicated server, with say 30ms latency things seemed very smooth/fast. Maybe I wasn't really getting 120fps, or maybe consoles are different, but why are we limited to 30 fps with 30ms latency on consoles?

Tapatalk ...