Developments that may make PS3 multiplatform games more attractive than 360

Status
Not open for further replies.
[quote name='Thomas96']I think that people want PS3 but they couldn't afford it.. so once the PS3 gets in the price range then more and more people will start to buy them up. But there was some issues that PS3 games were not up to par with the 360 versions of the game. Every game that comes out gets a comparison video from Gametrailers, and other media outlets. To get people to buy on the PS3, PS3 needs to sell, but before it can sell, consumers need to trust that if they start to buy games on the PS3 that they aren't going to be gimped. If you look at the games that released in 2008, there weren't any games that I can remember that were subpar on the PS3... when compared to the 360. At least there wasn't anything that made the 360 vastly superior. WHich is why MS invested in getting some exclusive DLC (imo) .. at least one of the reasons. The PS3 was outselling the 360 for almost the entire year of 2008... like wombat mentioned ont he cagcasts it took 2 price drops before MS started to start to sell more consoles (per month) than the PS3. So there's a market for the system, the devs know it and Sony knows it. As long as there is money to be made then the system will get the games.
.[/quote]
I agree, once the PS3 price tag goes down sales will go up, one reason among others. It's funny how people say a price reduction will barely do anything, yet it was the only thing that saved 360 from being outsold by PS3 for the entire year.
 
[quote name='dmaul1114']Not hot under the collar at all. A bit annoyed at myself for wasting time talking about this crap when I hardly even play games these days. But I'm sick and don't feel up to doing much else than goofing online. *shrugs*

And I just get tired of reading shit from people that have loyalty to corporations of any kind. I hate them all equally, they all just want my money and want to get as much as they can by overcharging as much as they can for their various products! :D

It's good for them in one sense as they keep making money. But in the other they lose developer support just like they have this generation by launching late and getting behind in the market share race.

Devs quickly move on to the next gen machines, again there wasn't really any major third party releases on the PS2 the past couple of years despite the consoles still selling fairly well.

Do the same again next generation (launch later and start in the hole) and they're screwed. They have to do the best they can this gen, and have the PS4 ready to launch the same time as the next Xbox and for the same price or less if they want to get back in the game.[/quote]
Yes, but MS is screwing over customers and gamers more this generation than any other company before them. I don't have loyalty beyond one generation. I look at what each company offers, what their prices are on everything, what kind of things they do behind the scenes, and then I support the one that is offering the best games, value, and integrity.

If you hardly even play games anymore I really don't think you should try to argue over what's going on in the industry right now. If you're aware of how companies want to get the most money they can out of you, then you should seriously look at what MS is doing as a company.
 
[quote name='Ronin317']First off, you're talking worldwide numbers, which of course Sony will have the lead on, due to larger install bases in Europe and Japan. In the US, the 360 and Live flat-out pummel Sony and PSN. Secondly, if you read the article you posted...




Raw numbers don't always tell the real story.[/QUOTE]

yeah cause everyone on the PS3 forum got counted 2 or 3 times, once for the US, once for the UK and and one mo for Tokyo! lol ssshhhhh don't tell MS that!

I made the same argument reference the 360 sales where people are buying 2 and 3 systems to replace old ones.
 
[quote name='dmaul1114']Not hot under the collar at all. A bit annoyed at myself for wasting time talking about this crap when I hardly even play games these days. But I'm sick and don't feel up to doing much else than goofing online. *shrugs*

And I just get tired of reading shit from people that have loyalty to corporations of any kind. I hate them all equally, they all just want my money and want to get as much as they can by overcharging as much as they can for their various products! :D



It's good for them in one sense as they keep making money. But in the other they lose developer support just like they have this generation by launching late and getting behind in the market share race.

Devs quickly move on to the next gen machines, again there wasn't really any major third party releases on the PS2 the past couple of years despite the consoles still selling fairly well.

Do the same again next generation (launch later and start in the hole) and they're screwed. They have to do the best they can this gen, and have the PS4 ready to launch the same time as the next Xbox and for the same price or less if they want to get back in the game.[/QUOTE]


The PS2 hasn't lost much developer support. The PS2 still has a healthy library of games. Developers see that there is still money to be made there. The real issue w/ the PS3 isn't that they launched too late, they launched too early. Truth is Sony was not ready to launch the PS3. Games weren't ready, the XMB OS, didn't have all its features in place, they didn't have enough consoles. I think... Sony rushed the PS3 to market so that they could capitalize on the Blu Ray market. They weren't prepared for the gaming market. That's why they got off to such a bad start and they had the highest price console (by far). I wouldn't launch a PS4 unless the PS3 never gets any steam. You got GOW III, the Team ICO game, and more. Those games will to jump start some sales. Remember, when EA came out and said that they made most of their profits on the PS3 console.. then that's got to make other developers feel like they can make a profit on the PS3 as well. I think that the PS3 will be able to compete with a newer xbox or a newer Wii. The main thing is that IF Sony brings out a new console..... if it comes late, or early, the main thing is that they need to be prepared.. Launch titles, system features in place, online features ready to go.. day one, and more than enough consoles for launch.
 
[quote name='Thomas96']The PS2 hasn't lost much developer support. The PS2 still has a healthy library of games. Developers see that there is still money to be made there. [/QUOTE]

Disagree. Other than ports like the Treyarch CoD games, Madden etc. it's largely been shovelware and good niche titles like JRPGs etc.

Nothing mainstream more casual gamers like me give a crap about. We don't play those nice genres and for franchises like Madden and CoD on the next gen systems with the latest and greatest graphics and features.

My main point is yeah old consoles and games on them can sell into the next generation-- but it doesn't help the company win the console sales a race in that next generation.

Most people move on to the new consoles with in a couple years and focus on playing the latest and greatest games there. The old consoles just sell niche games to the hardcore crowd, and Madden to people who can't afford a next gen system etc.

Great for Sony as they make money, but the continued PS2 sales aren't helping the PS3 compete this generation and the PS3 lasting longer into next gen won't help the PS4 compete. Sony makes money selling last gen stuff, but it does nothing to help them beat MS or Nintendo in the current battle. If any thing it hurts since people can put off buying a PS3 longer since they have new JPRGs or whatever to play on their PS2.
 
If Sony were smart, they would take the DLC that comes out for 360 games and release the *Sony* version on the Blu-Ray with both game and DLC for regular price.

The Blu-ray has the storage capacity and it would generate interest in games that are more than simple ports for PS3.
 
[quote name='Nephlabobo']If Sony were smart, they would take the DLC that comes out for 360 games and release the *Sony* version on the Blu-Ray with both game and DLC for regular price.

The Blu-ray has the storage capacity and it would generate interest in games that are more than simple ports for PS3.[/QUOTE]

It's not like they have that option.

The developers want to hold it out seperate as they make big bucks selling the DLC (no shipping costs, pressing costs etc.).

So Sony would have to pay the developer enough to offset how much money they lose by not selling the DLC on the PS3.
 
[quote name='dmaul1114']Disagree. Other than ports like the Treyarch CoD games, Madden etc. it's largely been shovelware and good niche titles like JRPGs etc.

Nothing mainstream more casual gamers like me give a crap about. We don't play those nice genres and for franchises like Madden and CoD on the next gen systems with the latest and greatest graphics and features.

My main point is yeah old consoles and games on them can sell into the next generation-- but it doesn't help the company win the console sales a race in that next generation.

Most people move on to the new consoles with in a couple years and focus on playing the latest and greatest games there. The old consoles just sell niche games to the hardcore crowd, and Madden to people who can't afford a next gen system etc.

Great for Sony as they make money, but the continued PS2 sales aren't helping the PS3 compete this generation and the PS3 lasting longer into next gen won't help the PS4 compete. Sony makes money selling last gen stuff, but it does nothing to help them beat MS or Nintendo in the current battle. If any thing it hurts since people can put off buying a PS3 longer since they have new JPRGs or whatever to play on their PS2.[/QUOTE]


The PS2 is great for casual and mainstream, that's why it gets the Maddens, Rock Bands, and shovelware. That's the PS2 audience. But, there's still some hardcore gamers that play the system, and there's some titles for them. What the PS2 does is help to keep Sony customers with Sony. There are just some people that can't afford a PS3 or any console priced more than 250 dollars. There are some that refuse to pay over 250 dollars for any gaming machine. [not including tax] If the PS2 was the only system that you owned.. you'd still have some good games to play. PS2 didn't get a lot of the AAA titles, but its those nich and mainstrem titles that continue to bring people to the PS2 aisles. What Sony needs to do is get these PS2 games... make them playable on the PS3 (all versions), and PSP2 as downloadables. [am I wrong for wanting the PSP2 to be like a Portable PS2?]
 
I agree. I'm just saying it doesn't help with getting developers to support the PS3 with exclusives or it as the lead sku.

And that's the only thing of interest to those of us who have taken the next gen plunge--which system has the most games we want to play and which has the best version of multiplatform games.
 
[quote name='Thomas96']The PS2 hasn't lost much developer support... Remember, when EA came out and said that they made most of their profits on the PS3 console.. then that's got to make other developers feel like they can make a profit on the PS3 as well. I think that the PS3 will be able to compete with a newer xbox or a newer Wii. The main thing is that IF Sony brings out a new console..... if it comes late, or early, the main thing is that they need to be prepared.. Launch titles, system features in place, online features ready to go.. day one, and more than enough consoles for launch.[/quote]

PS2 is dying at retail. It's only a matter of time before a major retailer drops it and it starts a quick spiral to irrelevance. Overall sales are WAY down versus last year.

The reason EA had more profit on the PS3 in their FY2008 was solely due to favorable currency conversion from Europe and Japan. It is irrelevant to future business decisions. Their gross sales were still 2 to 1 in favor of the 360.
 
[quote name='J7.']
Duh... Never said that 4 arcade cabinets will make PS3 beat out 360. Here's what I said: "I don't know how far they will take these developments, but if they have a lot of multiplatforms do this, it may have people buying PS3 versions instead of 360." If they can get all the big releases (best games) to do this it will help get some people to buy the PS3 version instead of the 360. If both games are equal but you get more by buying the PS3 version, it will influence people. If 360 offerred anything like this for RE 5 I would plan to get it for 360, but as it is now I'll get the PS3 version.[/quote]

Looks at the OP:

First thing is that PS3 games will now be allowing you to access arcade games within home for free. Resident Evil 5's space in Home will have an arcade game that is accessible for free if you own RE 5.

Second thing is that trophies you unlock in PS3 games will allow you to get items within home for free. Yes, trophies will be worth something for more than gamerscore.
Click to expand...


That's what you said in the OP. You're first 2 arguments were for items in HOME.

Anything you typed after that is a joke, cause you clearly have sustained some type of head trauma to ever believe HOME will tip the scales to the PS3.
 
[quote name='Thomas96']yeah cause everyone on the PS3 forum got counted 2 or 3 times, once for the US, once for the UK and and one mo for Tokyo! lol ssshhhhh don't tell MS that!

I made the same argument reference the 360 sales where people are buying 2 and 3 systems to replace old ones.[/quote]
I didn't say that. The point is that the 360 dominates in the US, and that's not the case in other territories. Which equals a larger install base, as the 360 is a bit player everywhere else (save for the UK).

to your second point - the numbers discussed were ACTIVE LIVE ACCOUNTS, not systems sold. Are you assuming that when people replace a broken 360, they are registering a whole new gamertag and such, and leaving their gamerscore behind?


As for the rest of this thread...it seems that J7 here has a boner for Sony and some personal vendetta against Microsoft. How exactly is MS Screwing consumers and gamers this generation more than any other company ever has? What the fuck is that noise? And why do you give a fuck what other people buy and play?

And, J7, if you want to talk about screwing over gamers, you should read up on the Sega 32X, the Nintendo 64, or the Sony rootkit. You have done nothing but spout Sony fanboy shit for a week on this forum, with a ton of conjecture. It's a shame, because this thread could have been a good discussion, but it's nothing but a fanboy shouting over actual facts and intelligent discussion.
 
[quote name='Ronin317']I didn't say that. The point is that the 360 dominates in the US, and that's not the case in other territories. Which equals a larger install base, as the 360 is a bit player everywhere else (save for the UK).

to your second point - the numbers discussed were ACTIVE LIVE ACCOUNTS, not systems sold. Are you assuming that when people replace a broken 360, they are registering a whole new gamertag and such, and leaving their gamerscore behind?


As for the rest of this thread...it seems that J7 here has a boner for Sony and some personal vendetta against Microsoft. How exactly is MS Screwing consumers and gamers this generation more than any other company ever has? What the fuck is that noise? And why do you give a fuck what other people buy and play?

And, J7, if you want to talk about screwing over gamers, you should read up on the Sega 32X, the Nintendo 64, or the Sony rootkit. You have done nothing but spout Sony fanboy shit for a week on this forum, with a ton of conjecture. It's a shame, because this thread could have been a good discussion, but it's nothing but a fanboy shouting over actual facts and intelligent discussion.[/QUOTE]


I was agreeing with you [ and with MS because they think that the PSN user number may not be accurate] because the PSN number may not be totally accurate as that number may be inflated with registrations of persons that registered more than once. I was just comparing that situation to the number of consoles that MS sales - meaning that they may have the lead on PS3 in sales, but it could be assisted by the fact that some customers have had to buy multiple systems to replace the bad ones (or in hopes of getting the jasper chipped system). I don't think people are going to register more than one gamertag and activate it.. if you do that then you pay twice for live.
 
[quote name='jkanownik']PS2 is dying at retail. It's only a matter of time before a major retailer drops it and it starts a quick spiral to irrelevance. Overall sales are WAY down versus last year.

The reason EA had more profit on the PS3 in their FY2008 was solely due to favorable currency conversion from Europe and Japan. It is irrelevant to future business decisions. Their gross sales were still 2 to 1 in favor of the 360.[/QUOTE]

The PS2 is dying, however, the best way to show a products strength is to show the shelf space that it gets at the B&M retailers. All B&M retailers give the PS2 a big section of their store. No its not at the front of Best buy anymore, however it still gets a lot of shelf space. WHen you say sales are down, are you referring to consoles, or software? Because its really about the software at this point. I'm pretty sure that's down as well though. But the main thing is that, its still a viable market. There's still money to be made on the console. When does the PS3 get thrown out of retail? Of course its a matter of time, but how much more time would you give it?


its about time the PS2 to go... The 360 has a great library and its a pretty good ssytem at the right price. These are the PS2 customers upgrading their system.. some are compelled to go the 360 because its cheap price (and their unwillingness to spend 400 dollars)... PS3 can't get down to 200 dollars now, but you price drop here, and you price drop there, and over time, you get your customers back. The 800,000 persons who bought a 360 (most for the 1st time) aren't going to be in the market for another console for I'd say at least another year... so by next year, Sony needs to be at 249 or less so that they can captilize on those 800,000 customers that went on shopping sprees during the 08 Holiday Season.
 
[quote name='Ronin317']I didn't say that. The point is that the 360 dominates in the US, and that's not the case in other territories. Which equals a larger install base, as the 360 is a bit player everywhere else (save for the UK).

to your second point - the numbers discussed were ACTIVE LIVE ACCOUNTS, not systems sold. Are you assuming that when people replace a broken 360, they are registering a whole new gamertag and such, and leaving their gamerscore behind?


As for the rest of this thread...it seems that J7 here has a boner for Sony and some personal vendetta against Microsoft. How exactly is MS Screwing consumers and gamers this generation more than any other company ever has? What the fuck is that noise? And why do you give a fuck what other people buy and play?
[/quote]

Like I said, active Live accounts can just as easily be duplicates. A lot of people create multiple silver accounts to get the free months of gold that come with them.

I'm going to take a wild guess and say J7 thinks MS is screwing people by selling a system with such a high failure rate, when they knew it had the problem.
 
[quote name='HowStern']
I'm going to take a wild guess and say J7 thinks MS is screwing people by selling a system with such a high failure rate, when they knew it had the problem.[/QUOTE]

Which sucks, but at least after being dicks about it for a year or so they have been fixing them for free.

Thankfully I've not been bitten by the RROD yet *knocks on wood*.
 
[quote name='dmaul1114']Disagree. Other than ports like the Treyarch CoD games, Madden etc. it's largely been shovelware and good niche titles like JRPGs etc.

Nothing mainstream more casual gamers like me give a crap about. We don't play those nice genres and for franchises like Madden and CoD on the next gen systems with the latest and greatest graphics and features.

My main point is yeah old consoles and games on them can sell into the next generation-- but it doesn't help the company win the console sales a race in that next generation.

Most people move on to the new consoles with in a couple years and focus on playing the latest and greatest games there. The old consoles just sell niche games to the hardcore crowd, and Madden to people who can't afford a next gen system etc.

Great for Sony as they make money, but the continued PS2 sales aren't helping the PS3 compete this generation and the PS3 lasting longer into next gen won't help the PS4 compete. Sony makes money selling last gen stuff, but it does nothing to help them beat MS or Nintendo in the current battle. If any thing it hurts since people can put off buying a PS3 longer since they have new JPRGs or whatever to play on their PS2.[/quote]
If two consoles are roughly neck to neck in hardware and software by the time the generation ends and one of them continues on to sell more hardware and software after the other one bales, then I would say the one who goes on longer and gets more sales is the winner in terms of hardware and software.

The earliest console release always gets good support at first, then those games are later ported to the later release console. This trend is most evident in recent generations. Yes, software sales on a last gen console will help secure more on its next gen console, but they're not the only determinator. Do you think 360 got the support it did because of the success of the Xbox compared to PS2?

PS2 sales are not hurting PS3 more than PS2 sales are helping Sony make needed cash. That is not "doing nothing to help them beat MS or Nintendo in the current battle".

[quote name='dmaul1114']It's not like they have that option.

The developers want to hold it out seperate as they make big bucks selling the DLC (no shipping costs, pressing costs etc.).

So Sony would have to pay the developer enough to offset how much money they lose by not selling the DLC on the PS3.[/quote]
He said DLC on 360, not PS3. It could possibly be worth Sony's money to pay to get exclusive 360 DLC onto PS3 and include it with a rerelease of a game at the same time said DLC is released on 360. It all depends on the contracts MS has regarding the DLC. As for DLC on PS3 retail games as dmaul mistakenly suggested, publishers already do this, but you only see it happen on the most successful games like Oblivion, COD4, etc. It's not worth it on smaller games that do not have exclusive DLC.
 
[quote name='dmaul1114']It's not like they have that option.

The developers want to hold it out seperate as they make big bucks selling the DLC (no shipping costs, pressing costs etc.).

So Sony would have to pay the developer enough to offset how much money they lose by not selling the DLC on the PS3.[/quote]
He said DLC on 360, not PS3. It could possibly be worth Sony's money to pay to get exclusive 360 DLC onto PS3 and include it with a rerelease of a game at the same time said DLC is released on 360. It all depends on the contracts MS has regarding the DLC. As for DLC on PS3 retail games as dmaul mistakenly suggested, publishers already do this, but you only see it happen on the most successful games like Oblivion, COD4, etc. It's not worth it on smaller games that do not have exclusive DLC.
 
[quote name='jkanownik']PS2 is dying at retail. It's only a matter of time before a major retailer drops it and it starts a quick spiral to irrelevance. Overall sales are WAY down versus last year.
[/quote]
He was referring more towards how PS2 has done since the debut of the 360. Q4 2005 onwards.

[quote name='manthing']Looks at the OP:

That's what you said in the OP. You're first 2 arguments were for items in HOME.

Anything you typed after that is a joke, cause you clearly have sustained some type of head trauma to ever believe HOME will tip the scales to the PS3.[/quote]
You're still not getting it :roll:, a bit slow in the head perhaps or maybe you know your original comment was off base and the only thing you can do now is to try childish insults instead or that's what you always do since your original post in this thread was just a stupid insult. Again, you said: "To be fair, I don't think TMK is delusional enough to think having 4 arcade cabinets in Home, or a free COD6 t-shirt for your avatar is gonna tip the scales to the PS3."

Underlined so you understand this time!
And I said the free arcade games and trophy rewards may have people buying PS3 versions of games instead of 360, but it depends on how far they will take these developments. If they can get all the big released (best games) to do this it will help get some people to buy PS3 games instead of the 360 ver of the same game. If both games are equal but you get more by buying the PS3 version, it will influence people. Apparently you do not have the ability to see beyond 4 arcade games to all big titles.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
[quote name='manthing']Looks at the OP:




That's what you said in the OP. You're first 2 arguments were for items in HOME.

Anything you typed after that is a joke, cause you clearly have sustained some type of head trauma to ever believe HOME will tip the scales to the PS3.[/quote]
You're still not getting it :roll:, a bit slow in the head perhaps or maybe you know your original comment was off base and the only thing you can do now is to try childish insults instead or that's what you always do since your original post in this thread was just a stupid insult. Again, you said: "To be fair, I don't think TMK is delusional enough to think having 4 arcade cabinets in Home, or a free COD6 t-shirt for your avatar is gonna tip the scales to the PS3."

Underlined so you understand this time!
And I said the free arcade games and trophy rewards may have people buying PS3 versions of games instead of 360, but it depends on how far they will take these developments. If they can get all the big released (best games) to do this it will help get some people to buy PS3 games instead of the 360 ver of the same game. If both games are equal but you get more by buying the PS3 version, it will influence people.
 
[quote name='Ronin317']
As for the rest of this thread...it seems that J7 here has a boner for Sony and some personal vendetta against Microsoft. How exactly is MS Screwing consumers and gamers this generation more than any other company ever has? What the fuck is that noise? And why do you give a fuck what other people buy and play?

And, J7, if you want to talk about screwing over gamers, you should read up on the Sega 32X, the Nintendo 64, or the Sony rootkit. You have done nothing but spout Sony fanboy shit for a week on this forum, with a ton of conjecture. It's a shame, because this thread could have been a good discussion, but it's nothing but a fanboy shouting over actual facts and intelligent discussion.[/quote]
I already typed how they have. Did you not read it? Here it is again.

They stole the Cell design from Sony, they rushed their hardware and released it even though they knew it was faulty, they have a closed online environment that is bad for developers, they charge for online which is bs, they limited file sizes on XBL until just this week (which now screws over their customers without an HDD), they used DVD which has restricted some developers and is now restricting some more (and despite knowing DVD would require additional game discs they don't package them properly and they get scratched), they force proprietary accessories on you, they nickel and dime consumers to death. But I guess you like to support this kind of shit and enjoy consuming it. edit: Instead of investing in 1st party studios to create great exclusives for their systems as Sony has, they resort to throwing cash to get exclusives and even worse exclusive DLC, which hurts most those who do not keep as up to date on gaming industry developments as others who find out their version of the game will not be continued. Throwing cash out for exclusives that would've came to both systems (1st party exclusives you always know will be exclusive so no worries for the future) segments gamers and it also screws over people when they find out that they bought a system for a specific game which is now for another system.

Why do I give a shit what other people buy and play :lol:. Jesus Christ. Because it affects what I get to buy and play. If people buy and play only 360 I and everyone else would get the type of crap I just posted above. What if people only bought and played Wii? Would you like that? No, I don't think you would want only Wii and what Nintendo offers, would you.

I know all about 32x and N64. That was 10-15 years ago. What relevance does that have to what we are discussing? Sony didn't make those platforms and I am not defending Sega or Nintendo here. The Sony Rootkit was for audio cd's as far as I know, and it was incredibly stupid of them, and they paid for that mistake. If Sony was doing shit like MS is with 360 I would be defending MS here and talking negatively about Sony.

As I said I have not been loyal to a company beyond one console generation. I look at what each company offers, what their prices are on everything, what kind of things they do behind the scenes, and then I support the one that is offering the best games, value, and integrity. If this change mid generation my loyalty might change as well. I am only loyal based on those things, not blind devotion. I support whats best for all gamers and consumers. What is most right and what holds justice.

I haven't spouted nothing but Sony fanboy shit. I have presented facts and possibilities, I haven't said what is going to happen or say things are completely impossible as others have. You think I'm so full of Sony just because I've had to deal with people being jerks and trying to make me into a fucking villain.

[quote name='Thomas96']I was agreeing with you [ and with MS because they think that the PSN user number may not be accurate] because the PSN number may not be totally accurate as that number may be inflated with registrations of persons that registered more than once. I was just comparing that situation to the number of consoles that MS sales - meaning that they may have the lead on PS3 in sales, but it could be assisted by the fact that some customers have had to buy multiple systems to replace the bad ones (or in hopes of getting the jasper chipped system). I don't think people are going to register more than one gamertag and activate it.. if you do that then you pay twice for live.[/quote]
I understood what you meant, it obviously went over his head because he did not take the time to read it properly. And if he's wondering why I'm being such a jerk he should look around.

[quote name='dmaul1114']Which sucks, but at least after being dicks about it for a year or so they have been fixing them for free.

Thankfully I've not been bitten by the RROD yet *knocks on wood*.[/quote]
They had no other choice. All 360's with the original design will eventually get RROD (if used near average amount of use). No reason to knock on wood unless as you say you don't use it much at all, then it might not ever get it, but then it was a waste to buy to begin with.

Howstern see the red text above. Figure you might read it this time if I make it so obvious.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
[quote name='dmaul1114']Which sucks, but at least after being dicks about it for a year or so they have been fixing them for free.

Thankfully I've not been bitten by the RROD yet *knocks on wood*.[/quote]
They had no other choice. All 360's with the original design will eventually get RROD (if used near average amount of use). No reason to knock on wood unless as you say you don't use it much at all, then it might not ever get it, but then it was a waste to buy to begin with.
 
[quote name='J7.']I know all about 32x and N64. That was 10-15 years ago. What relevance does that have to what we are discussing? Sony didn't make those platforms and I am not defending Sega or Nintendo here...[/quote]

I'll respond more at length when I have time, but you're going back and doublespeaking a ton here. Your whole red-text paragraph is YOUR OPINION, not fact. It's spun with your perspective. Microsoft did not 'steal' any processor - they had one designed that was similar, but not the same. And if you think that is the first time that has happened in the Consumer Electronics Industry, then you're wrong. By your definition, Sony stole their online system from the original xbox, and home from second life, etc. Imitation is what this industry thrives on. That is a fact, not an opinion. Apple "stole" the MP3 player from Diamond/Rio by your measure...then later 'stole' the portable video piece from everyone else who had video on their MP3 players for years before the iPod did (iRiver, Cowon, Archos).

As for the quote above - it has relevance because all of those listed were a much bigger fuck you to consumers than the 360 could ever be, especially the 32X. YOU said that MS is screwing gamers more than any other company ever has, then when questioned on it and provided with examples you argue the relevance of those examples. Keep running in circles, and you won't have to admit that you're wrong and spouting conjecture.

By the way, you can scream "I'm not a fanboy" all you like, but sitting around and suckling at the teat of one of the consoles while slamming others sure as hell looks like fanboy behavior. If it walks like a duck...all of the consoles have their pros and cons, and if you can only choose one then fine, but damn man, you are raging anti-MS.
 
Unless we see another SEGA console madness, or see Sony or Microsoft treat their consoles like a 3DO and Jaguar, I don't really see anyone really being "screwed" any time this generation. The only ones who got boned were Wii owners who expected Nintendo to churn out the usual.

But either way, those who have either of the three major consoles and are enjoying them aren't exactly being screwed in the slightest bit if they're getting their money's worth. Unless Sony decides to invest in some other form of high definition media format, PS3 owners who invested in the console for Blu-ray aren't being screwed.

Unless Microsoft decides to start charging more for Xbox Live and intend to release a new console that isn't backwards compatible with the 360, Xbox 360 owners are not being screwed.

Unless Nintendo decides to release an HD console with a hard drive that's fully compatible with Wii and GameCube games, along with having a library focused more on things the regular gamer enjoys, Wii owners are not being screwed.

Just shut up and enjoy the damn consoles you bought. Be thankful you're not having the same shit happening now that happened back in the late '90s where companies abandoned hardware after release and made false advertising to try to push a product to do something it wasn't meant to do or worse, charging you close to more than $100 for certain REGULAR games.
 
[quote name='Tsukento']Unless we see another SEGA console madness, or see Sony or Microsoft treat their consoles like a 3DO and Jaguar, I don't really see anyone really being "screwed" any time this generation. The only ones who got boned were Wii owners who expected Nintendo to churn out the usual.

But either way, those who have either of the three major consoles and are enjoying them aren't exactly being screwed in the slightest bit if they're getting their money's worth. Unless Sony decides to invest in some other form of high definition media format, PS3 owners who invested in the console for Blu-ray aren't being screwed.

Unless Microsoft decides to start charging more for Xbox Live and intend to release a new console that isn't backwards compatible with the 360, Xbox 360 owners are not being screwed.

Unless Nintendo decides to release an HD console with a hard drive that's fully compatible with Wii and GameCube games, along with having a library focused more on things the regular gamer enjoys, Wii owners are not being screwed.

Just shut up and enjoy the damn consoles you bought. Be thankful you're not having the same shit happening now that happened back in the late '90s where companies abandoned hardware after release and made false advertising to try to push a product to do something it wasn't meant to do or worse, charging you close to more than $100 for certain REGULAR games.[/QUOTE]

I think that if you had to go through 2 or 3 360(s) before you could get one that didn't red ring.. you got screwed. Just because you got a smile on your face (because you're happy w/ MS, or the console) doesn't mean that you didn't get screwed.
 
Yeah this generation has probably dished out the hardest bonings ever. Nintendo practically released an as-seen-on-TV novelty arcade, Microsoft released something that's guaranteed to break, and Sony released a machine that's STILL retardedly overpriced.
 
[quote name='Ronin317']I'll respond more at length when I have time, but you're going back and doublespeaking a ton here. Your whole red-text paragraph is YOUR OPINION, not fact. It's spun with your perspective. Microsoft did not 'steal' any processor - they had one designed that was similar, but not the same. And if you think that is the first time that has happened in the Consumer Electronics Industry, then you're wrong. By your definition, Sony stole their online system from the original xbox, and home from second life, etc. Imitation is what this industry thrives on. That is a fact, not an opinion. Apple "stole" the MP3 player from Diamond/Rio by your measure...then later 'stole' the portable video piece from everyone else who had video on their MP3 players for years before the iPod did (iRiver, Cowon, Archos).

As for the quote above - it has relevance because all of those listed were a much bigger fuck you to consumers than the 360 could ever be, especially the 32X. YOU said that MS is screwing gamers more than any other company ever has, then when questioned on it and provided with examples you argue the relevance of those examples. Keep running in circles, and you won't have to admit that you're wrong and spouting conjecture.

By the way, you can scream "I'm not a fanboy" all you like, but sitting around and suckling at the teat of one of the consoles while slamming others sure as hell looks like fanboy behavior. If it walks like a duck...all of the consoles have their pros and cons, and if you can only choose one then fine, but damn man, you are raging anti-MS.[/quote]
I haven't doublespeaked. My red text paragraph is not merely opinion. Lets see...
-They stole the Cell design from Sony FACT proven below
-they rushed their hardware and released it even though they knew it was faulty FACT
-they have a closed online environment that is bad for developers FACT
-they charge for online which is bs FACT (only those who love Live think it's worth it, everyone else sees it for what it is, double charging for internet functionality)
-they limited file sizes on XBL until just this week (which now screws over their customers without an HDD) FACT
-they used DVD which has restricted some developers and is now restricting some more FACT GTA IV was restricted, they also say GTA V will be difficult to put on 360, Tekken 6 is being restricted.
-(and despite knowing DVD would require additional game discs they don't package them properly and they get scratched) FACT
-they force proprietary accessories on you FACT they do everything they can to make you have to use their HDD and wifi adapter despite everything else being able to work on it. Also their HDMI cable situation if you want optical audio out. They overcharge for these, etc.
-they nickel and dime consumers to death. FACT Their SKU strategy and console features result in many needing to buy their proprietary accessories which rip customers off, they force publishers to make just about anything MS can be charged for online (even though customers must pay for online :roll:), they encourage ridiculous DLC deals.
-Instead of investing in 1st party studios to create great exclusives for their systems as Sony has, they resort to throwing cash to get exclusives and even worse exclusive DLC, which hurts most those who do not keep as up to date on gaming industry developments as others who find out their version of the game will not be continued. Throwing cash out for exclusives that would've came to both systems (1st party exclusives you always know will be exclusive so no worries for the future) segments gamers and it also screws over people when they find out that they bought a system for a specific game which is now for another system. FACT

MS stealing Cell processor: (or pick up the Game Informer issue with their interview)

When the companies entered into their partnership in 2001, Sony, Toshiba and IBM committed themselves to spending $400 million over five years to design the Cell, not counting the millions of dollars it would take to build two production facilities for making the chip itself. IBM provided the bulk of the manpower, with the design team headquartered at its Austin, Texas, offices. Sony and Toshiba sent teams of engineers to Austin to live and work with their partners in an effort to have the Cell ready for the Playstation 3's target launch, Christmas 2005.

But a funny thing happened along the way: A new "partner" entered the picture. In late 2002, Microsoft approached IBM about making the chip for Microsoft's rival game console, the (as yet unnamed) Xbox 360. In 2003, IBM's Adam Bennett showed Microsoft specs for the still-in-development Cell core. Microsoft was interested and contracted with IBM for their own chip, to be built around the core that IBM was still building with Sony.

All three of the original partners had agreed that IBM would eventually sell the Cell to other clients. But it does not seem to have occurred to Sony that IBM would sell key parts of the Cell before it was complete and to Sony's primary videogame-console competitor. The result was that Sony's R&D money was spent creating a component for Microsoft to use against it.

Mr. Shippy and Ms. Phipps detail the resulting absurdity: IBM employees hiding their work from Sony and Toshiba engineers in the cubicles next to them; the Xbox chip being tested a few floors above the Cell design teams. Mr. Shippy says that he felt "contaminated" as he sat down with the Microsoft engineers, helping them to sketch out their architectural requirements with lessons learned from his earlier work on Playstation.
http://online.wsj.com/article/SB123069467545545011.html

THAT IS NOT THE SAME AS MERE IMITATION. Did Sony get MS to spend all the money, research, time, planning, etc to build their online infrastructure. No. Read up on shit if you're going to try to argue factual information. You're arguing something different than I am. Did Apple have the makers of Diamond Rio directly fund the design and development of the Ipod. No.

Sega's decisions and outcome with 32X were primarily a result of miscommunication between between Japan and NA parts of the company. Something else you should look into reading about.

I got a 360 before PS3. I didn't know everything back then I do now about the moves and choices MS has made since development on it started. That info is still coming to light, and it certainly ain't pretty. I already explained what type of loyalty I give. It's conditional on what the companies do and can change at any time.
 
[quote name='Tsukento']But either way, those who have either of the three major consoles and are enjoying them aren't exactly being screwed in the slightest bit if they're getting their money's worth. Unless Sony decides to invest in some other form of high definition media format, PS3 owners who invested in the console for Blu-ray aren't being screwed.

Unless Microsoft decides to start charging more for Xbox Live and intend to release a new console that isn't backwards compatible with the 360, Xbox 360 owners are not being screwed.

Just shut up and enjoy the damn consoles you bought. Be thankful you're not having the same shit happening now that happened back in the late '90s where companies abandoned hardware after release and made false advertising to try to push a product to do something it wasn't meant to do or worse, charging you close to more than $100 for certain REGULAR games.[/quote]
Yes I agree with what you're saying. Where I am coming from is that MS is doing all these things to bleed you of money that they shouldn't be. That their competitors have not. As I said the reason I care is because it does affect me. If people didn't object to stuff they clearly see as wrong then companies could keep doing whatever they damn please at our expense.

As far as advertising something to do it wasn't meant to do, that has always been done and will always be done, there is nothing we can do about that, it's just not feasible.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
bread's done
Back
Top