Earlier I wrote a blog, to outline why Microsoft is not good for the industry and why the statement 'Competition is good for the industry' wasn't completely true. I got quite a lot of backlash, but guys, it was a trap blog.
This is exactly what I mean. Microsoft's whole DRM debacle put these stupid console wars at an all time high. Even after they took out the DRM, these fanboy wars are still going full force and you guys who said I admitted I was a fanboy from my clarification that I'm a huge Sony and Nintendo fan, were twisting what was in the blog and fell into the trap. Even with the points I made, some of you guys still kept saying competition is good. Fair enough I didn't drive all my points home, but I have a reason for that.
There are a few points that I deliberately missed out. Look at it like this: A company who doesn't care about games is not good for the industry. And I have something to prove that. Julie Larson-Green is now the main boss of the Xbox division! She deserves unprecedented amounts of respect, but quite frankly, she's not a gamer. A lot of people in MS don't care about gaming. There was this conversation between Don Mattrick, Steven Spielberg and George Lucas, about the future of entertainment. So they get onto the topic of videogames and Spielberg and Lucas are bashing videogames and Mattrick doesn't say a damn thing. See? Now if someone like Mark Cerny or Reggie Fils-Aime was in Mattrick's position, they would've had a very big debate with Lucas and Spielberg! Now do you get it? We all know to much of a focus on multimedia is not a good thing. That's why the launch of the PS3 was so terrible and why the Xbox One reveal was such a flop! Even though the launch of the PS3 was so focused on multimedia, Sony quite quickly started to pump out exclusives. We all know the PS3 has more exclusives than the 360. And they have more variety as well, from 2D platformers to horror. The only exclusives I can think of for the 360 are shooters and Kinect games.
Now the points that I made about what MS has done that has been bad for gaming. I didn't say they ruined gaming. A lot of you guys were asking for proof that what MS did in regards to E3 was true. I why didn't I? To make the bait more enticing. To get you guys more against what I said. Here is the proof to all the things that I listed.
MS using high end PCs at E3:
http://www.cinemablend.com/...
MS raids Nintendo E3 Best Buy:
http://www.youtube.com/watc...
MS pays 3rd party publishers not to show PS4 games at E3:
http://news.softpedia.com/n...
http://www.youtube.com/watc...
MS damage controlling on Reddit:
http://www.businessinsider....
You see?
Lastly let me talk about like moneyhats and stuff. I think there have been way to many multiplats and AAA games lately. Most of these AAA games are FPS' which NO ONE can deny MS has been encouraging. The whole DLC coming out a month early and how most of their 1st parties are shooters. Even Sunset Overdrive, a stylized open world game, is a shooter. Shooters everywhere. That's not to say that Call of duty isn't one of the top selling franchises on the PS3, but at least Sony is using variety with their 1st parties. The Order 1886 is going to be a shooter, but what else does Sony have? Little Pig Planet, God of War (action game, but I'm not a huge fan of it), Uncharted (has shooter elements but primarily an action adventure platformer) Infamous, and then you look at their 3rd party exclusives with the PS3, which are mostly good JRPGs. Tales of Graces F, Valkyria Chronicles and Ratchet and Clank (Not an RPG but an action platformer). MS only have shooters like Gears of War and Halo and a bunch of Western multiplats. If we want to see innovation, then we need to see less shooters (not saying I hate them all, but they're lacking a lot. E.X. Troopers is cool though) and less 'triple A games'. A different blogger has already said that AAA games are tying down innovation and creativity in the mainstream market. Sony and even now Nintendo, are embracing indie devs more than ever, which is a great thing. Not saying mainstream games aren't awesome sometimes, but that's pretty much all that MS promotes with their consoles. The most casual games in the most casual genres. Look at EA. There are rumors going around that they're jacking up the price of their games to $80.
http://www.youtube.com/watc...
Why? Because these AAA games are taking more and more to make as all EA makes is casual games apart from stuff like Mirror's Edge. But these casual games take SO much to make now. That's why we might get a price jack up from EA. And MS encourages this! Apart from this year, what games have you seen at MS' press conference at E3? SHOOTERS! KINECT GAMES! And to top it all off, if you're an indie you can't self publish. Did you see one indie game at MS' E3 this year? NO! The only reason that they had actual games this year at E3 was because they needed to scramble big time from the initial reveal of the XB1. Remember that! Next year at E3, it'll be all about Windows 8 on XB1 and TV services updates! If you actually think MS will maintain this, your forgetting what happened with the 360. They paid for timed exclusives (in this case it MIGHT be Titanfall) and had actual exclusives, then 2-3 years afterwards, it was multiplats everywhere! Another thing that I said MS does is moneyhat. Now lets be honest. M$ has deep pockets. You probably saw me talk about KH3 and FFXV. Now I think Square Enix would've made them multiplats in the anyway, but do you really think Square didn't get a fat check from MS to put those games on the Xbone? Of course they did! If they didn't make 100% sure those games were on their platform it would've been the death blow for them. Point. Blank. Period. I hate moneyhats because it's essentially throwing around money to get games that would've been exclusives to a platform apart from theirs, to save or maintain there own asses. I hope it stops later on. We already know M$ is using $400 million on that partnership with the NFL. But let's be clear here: They're only getting in the games now, so that they can have a bigger install base and then take a huge multimedia approach at the right time. Trust me on that.
Now for people saying I'm a fanboy. Why do you think I said that I'm a huge PlayStation and Nintendo fan and that I have a bias? Again, to lure you in. You guys who automatically took what I said and then twisted it and commented 'He admitted he's a fanboy', weren't paying attention. When I talked about the online pay wall, you saw that I said Sony is doing it too with the PS4 and that even though PS+ is a good deal, it's still a pay wall didn't you? That should just hint to you that I don't think everything Sony does isn't amazing. In fact it can be quite bad. Just like I will now. SONY SCREWED UP THE LAUCNH OF THE PS3! It was too expensive and it didn't have that many launch titles. As for Nintendo, they goofed badly with the launch of the Wii U. The big 1st party games should've been developed alongside the console and they should've been there at launch or at least launch windows. I said that in the whole 30 years after the NES article. See?
And some people told me to sit back and watch when it comes to DRM. I didn't say anything about the DRM coming back. I just mentioned MS' failed attempt at DRM. I do think they'll put it back in though. I agree it's good to just watch but look at it like this: Microsoft was ready to implement all of these restrictions into the Xbox One. At E3, they technically told you at E3 that they were going to do it. Major Nelson told Angry Joe that they're doing it, that it's the future (which is bullshit) and that it's not easy to take it out. Enter the pre-orders and the PS4 is destroying the XB1. Just like that the DRM is 'gone' quote unquote. So let me ask you this: The DRM is inside that console when it comes into your house. You need to get a patch to 'get rid' of these restrictions. That patch is just covering the restrictions. It can be rolled off, whenever MS feel like it. So when they have enough units, don't you'll think they'll put it back in. I'll give it about 1 and a half to 2 years. Then if you have an Xbox One, on the day they put it back in, you'll see a notification or something saying something like: 'blah blah blah, 24 hour check ins and used game blockage' and 2 boxes saying 'I agree' and 'I disagree'. And if you click on the disagree, that thing won't work until you say agree. The sad thing is, it took this whole DRM debacle to get people clicked into how MS isn't good for the industry. Then after the pre-orders came about and MS was getting pummeled they reversed so they could hear the jingles from their pockets. Before that happened, every1 was saying MS needs to leave. And just like that, after their reversal, you mean to tell me that they're good competitors and good for the industry? Please.
And for the last time, don't say what Microsoft was doing was the future, because I'm gonna be blunt here and tell you that you're stupid. If you like DRM, go completely digital. Give me choices. That's what console are for. Sony and Nintendo are the only ones we really need.
Anyone that says Nintendo is 'doing there own thing' is right, but that's what we need in the industry now more than ever. VARIETY. M$ is just a low quality copy of Sony. Sony has more and better 1st party exclusives and more 3rd party exclusives as well. They also take actions as to what the consumer wants. Sony debunked all of these DRM policies at the reveal and then twice a few weeks before E3. They were never considering all this DRM:
http://www.eurogamer.net/ar...
http://www.eurogamer.net/ar...
http://www.vg247.com/2013/0...
http://www.nowgamer.com/new...
M$ doesn't care about gaming, unlike Sony and Nintendo. Sony and Nintendo also understand that the consumer is the one that you need to take care of, before you get the money. M$ doesn't.
You guys can still like the Xbox One and even M$ if you want. I'm just telling you that they're not good for the industry and that they need to go.
EDIT: I know what some of you guys are thinking. 'Your such a fanboy, go to a Sony or Nintendo forum to post this BS'. But that's the thing. I'm putting my opinions out on a place where I know I'll get a lot a flag. Doesn't that say something. Anyway, I'm sure you'll still disagree with me and that's fine. But let me just say that when the DRM was in play, everyone on this site and on many others, were saying almost the exact same thing. Think about that.
Trapped guys.
The friendly folks over at Razer recently sent us their full size Kishi Ultra mobile gaming controller, and this thing didn't disappoint.
VGChartz's Mark Nielsen: "Upon finally finishing Devil May Cry 5 recently - after it spent several years on my “I’ll play that soon” list - I considered giving it a fittingly-named Late Look article. However, considering that this was indeed the final piece I was missing in the DMC puzzle, I decided to instead take this opportunity to take a look back at the entirety of this genre-defining series and rank the entries. What also made this a particularly tempting notion was that while most high-profile series have developed fairly evenly over time, with a few bumps on the road, the history of Devil May Cry has, at least in my eyes, been an absolute roller coaster, with everything from total disasters to action game gold."
3,1,4,5 to me, never played 2. 5 gameplay is amazing but level design was really disappointing to me, just a bunch of plain arenas, the story felt like a worse written rehash of the 3rd and the charater models looked weird ( specially the ladies ). Another problem with 5 was that there was not enough content for 3 charaters so I could never really familiarize with any of them
TSA go hands on with the beta for Inazuma Eleven: Victory Road, but how is the game transitioning to the post-stylus era?
Personally I think the bigger fanboys are those who refuse to admit where a company screwed up. Some defended DRM (I'll even give some of them credit and say maybe they were interested into where family sharing could go) out of nothing more than fanboy bias and then jumped for joy when Microsoft removed the features. Though there may have been a few who were genuinely interested in it.
For Wii U I think Nintendo screwed up in two ways. The main problem (as you say) being a lack of true quality exclusives to get people buying it. The second is calling it Wii U. An awful lot of people in the UK haven't even heard of this thing. They ask me what it is. Others think it is an add on. Even a section on several stores in my area have Wii U stuff under the Wii section.
Very well written.
Same topic just different blog.............
I will give the Microsoft fanboys credit where it....... might not be due. But they rarely write a blog, atleast from what I've seen, about why they hate Sony or Nintendo. I'm sure those blogs are around but they are far and few in between. I have seen one.
Microsoft does alot of great things, especially in the world of philanthropy. So they (as if these corporations are people.....oh wait) do care. They are a software company first and people tend to forget that. They have all these software ideas floating around and we are gonna like some and hate many. They were ahead of their time during the 1990's : internet on your television, mobile computers (Tablets).
I think they just want to market their ideas now before anyone else comes up and overtakes them and is considered "the first". They are trying to be market leaders instead of followers. You have to take risks to do so. They are taking risks. You may not like them, but as you stated, many people liked the ideas that they presented concerning the original XBone. They saw the backlash, and they changed their tune (yes it was for money).
To each his own I say. I will never ever write a blog about Sony, Microsoft, or Nintendo. I like them all. Have they all made mistakes, yes. That is a given. But people are biased in their perception. I keep hearing this over and over again....... This is payback for 2006. That puts you at the same level as those people.
Game on.
Come on now, Sony isn't exactly squeaky clean now are they?
How many times has Sony been fined for price fixing? and what about the rookit DRM they added to millions of CDs literally infecting PCs with malware?
Open your eyes and realise that business is business regardless in what area, and to say that because somebody is in charge and doesn't play games is bad?
Let me tell you, there is nothing worse than when you are working on a product and your boss is telling you do add this and remove that because he thinks its what people wants because he knows about this kind of stuff... All it does it cost millions of dollars of set backs and delays. In the late 80s we were developing oceanography SONAR capsule to measure ocean pattern behaviour and the company who funded this project the CEO used to develop oceanography equipment and he thought his input would be vital, and long story short, he basically took over final decisions, ignored the team which specialised in critical areas of the project which sent the project over £3 million and was set back so much that another competitor got the global contracts and the project folded.
It's her job to sort out the business aspects, money flow and pie chart etc, its the dedicated specialists job to do the actual work to make things happen.
OK, I will admit that I have a general dislike towards Microsoft as far as their efforts in the realm of gaming go, it's not entirely undeserving either considering they bought up some talented devs, and along with them some great game franchises early on, and have since then decided the best course of action is to sit on them.
It's like the idea of those games been actual competition is daunting enough for MS to grab them before others do so, yet they obviously don't have enough faith in actually green lighting development for any of them... Anyway, on top of that there's the fact that they're still obnoxious enough to charge for online play, a feature that comes along with the retail disc that MS feels is necessary to hold for ransom.
They do some good things too of course, I loved the OG Xbox and the fist few years of the 360 were grand, also them trying to create an all in one multimedia device is an admirable undertaking, but it's still not worth losing all of our consumer rights over to draconian DRM just so as I can watch TV on my TV through my console.
Kinect 2, while the original being a big disappointment in my eyes, it's successor certainly sounds pretty good but knowing the ties MS has to the NSA and their infamous spying on consumers, I really just wouldn't feel comfortable in having one of their cameras in my home.
I don't know about MS needing to leave the console race, but I do think they certainly need to re-evaluate their policies and start asking consumers what they want, instead of trying to force profitable features down our throats at the cost of us gaming easily.
I read about half of this and it honestly feels like you wrote a half ***ed article, didn't like the negative comments and in turn decided to make it seem like you were doing some elaborate thing. True or not, you don't need to make a "fake post" just to prove a point you could do without applying any effort.
Anyway, i stopped reading because I feel like a lot of your points are based more off what you think / feel and lack a lot of research. Like you can prove M$ is bad, okay... that's super, but you seem to lack the scope to look at things from a grand scale.
Like M$ and Sony are pushing streaming / recording, where as Nintendo decided to make money off videos of X length (pretty much Let's Play videos) and originally banned steaming of Super Smash Bros Melee at Evo ( http://www.animenewsnetwork... ).
"Even Sunset Overdrive, a stylized open world game, is a shooter. Shooters everywhere."
As far as my research remark goes, what did you expect? It's made by Insomniac Games who made Resistance (FPS), Fuse (TPS) and Ratchet and Clank (with plenty of guns to use).