Time passes so quickly, we're already half-way through October and those Next-Gen consoles that seemed so far away are just looming over the horizons. Lines have been drawn in the sand, sides have been taken, shots have been fired and people lost their jobs in the process.
In an effort to turn the very nature of Gaming into a Nightmaish Corporate Wetdream, Microsoft attempted to force themselves on gamers and violate them in every way imaginable until they have no choice but to consent to a future where the consumer services the corporate machine.
Only the consumer wasn't having any of it.
Long story short, Microsoft caved and like the rapist that suddenly backs off because he was caught in the act by the cops, we're supposed to clap and pat them on the back for saying "Eh, well if Gamers didn't want me to violate them they shouldn't have kept those wallets wide open." Frankly, I'm not one to troll the countless sites on the internet and eschewing hatred for the Big M (plenty of people are doing that, God bless 'em) but I find it hard not to be offended to the very core when Microsoft attempts to act all morally superior when every Joe and Jane Gamer called them out on their b.s.
Yet even after I and everyone know had broken ties with Microsoft this generation, are we truly safe from their machinisations? The answer, quite simply, is no. This next gen, we'll still be royally screwed by the influence of the Big M.
1) Leading the Charge from Behind: Of the two, the Xbox One is almost half as powerful as the PS4 and yet the latter is getting ports that do not take advantage of its graphical prowess due to Devs living in fear of Microsof. We've seen evidence of this before, Microsoft using their infinite coffers to pay off Devs and now that shiny game for your PS4 gets stuck on 720P just because it doesn't want to be prettier than its cousin. Once again, it's up to Sony's First Party Devs to wow us next gen but it still stucks to be saddled
2) DLC, Mighty is He: Microsoft infected the genre with that cancer known as DLC the moment Horse Armor trotted unto the Xbox Marketplace. While I'm not against DLC as a way to enhance a game, unfortunately Microsoft was allowed to get away with so much crap that DLC turned from a game enhancing tool to the actual content of supposed game. When you get away with releasing an unfinished product (Forza 5), is it unkind to say the Capcom is entirely justified when they say their problems aren't making fun, enjoyable games but that there isn't ENOUGH DLC. More and more content will be cut on Multi-platform games, courtsey of the Big M's business practises.
3) Call of Doody, Call of Doody: Microsoft caught Lightning in a Bottle when they snagged the Dude-Bro Douchebags who probably bought only ten games for their Xbox 360 (Here's a hint, all shooters). Like Nintendo's own slice of the pie, Microsoft wants to lock this demographic in an iron-vice and never let 'em go. Everything about the Xbox One, from the very first reveal (where they only showed ONE game...a shooter, gee, I wonder why?) to the Doritos and Mountain Dew Ads that will plaster on your screens, was aimed at this particular demographic and the rest be damned. Yet, even though we are very content with our RPGS and Adventure games, we're still being inadvertedly harmed by this group. In an attempt to snag some of those numbers, Sony tried to get as many Shooters as possible in hopes of getting its own Halo. Shuhei Yoshida lamented the amount of shooters this gen (indeed, I only left my 360 and paid attention to the PS3 when it stopped peddling to this demographic and did it's own thing). Capcom gutted their Japanese roots and transformed their beloved franchises into grittier, action-y versions hoping to catch some of that trickle. While I have high hopes for Mark Cerny who champions the return to PS1's variety, I fear that Sony will cave once again and champion for more shooters.
4) DRM to Rule Us All: DRM will be back. It is inevitble. Please don't fool yourselves, you're embarassing the both of us. Several MS Execs came out and stated that their vision remains 'Unchanged' and once they have a large enough install base, they WILL patch it back in citing 'rising costs' and other soulless jargon and you know what...they will be lauded because people are that easy to fool. For Pete's sake, people are paying MORE for the privlege to see Ads on their Gold Membership!
Mark my words, this generation will be a litmus test for the consumer with Microsoft, once again, wading their waters and testing just how much thievery they can get away with...and once other companies start noticing, they'll follow suit.
After all, this is a world where people defend 'poor, selfless' Microsoft against the sub-humans who live in other countries...
Tactical, beautiful and wholly unique, the GOTY-winning sci-fi RTS returns with Homeworld 3.
WTMG's Leo Faria: "I don’t think Sagres is a bad game, but maybe I expected too much from it? It is full of neat ideas, and I was really hoping it would end up being something similar to old-school Sid Meier’s Pirates or Uncharted Waters, but it was marred by its small scope and what clearly looks like to be a small budget. The gameplay loop became repetitive after a while, as there is just so much you can do in terms of trading, loot, and exploring. The combat was an utter joke. I appreciate the effort, but this just didn’t land with me at all… though I guess I’m never going to see Pirates being ported over to the Switch, so I guess this will still have its niche appeal, as flawed as it is."
The Legend of Zelda: Tears of the Kingdom soundtrack to be released in standard and limited edition versions for first anniversary.
1. PC games never seem to lose their lustre current and next gen games, so is MS paying developers to make the PC version the best to make the PS4 look bad? If so thanks MS!
2. MS didn't invent DLC but they had the first console that introduced it largely, they didn't force it upon everyone and Sony has enough content of their own which is paid DLC from their own first party devs so whats your issue with that?
3.Call of Duty is one of the best selling games on the PS3, most best selling games on the PS3 are shooters, so prepare to don your shooter hat son for the next gen.
4. Every console has DRM. Copy protection is a form of DRM, when you try to play a game on the xbox and PS3 the console will checksum the disk to make sure its a legit copy... a form of DRM, Sony had online passes to unlock the online features of a game... A quasi form of DRM
So is this blog basically trying to say that Sony is trying to copy MS?
This is leaning a bit towards fanboy ranting, but it has a picture of Don Mattrick next to a turd so i approve.
This is nothing more than a rant. Multiple Call of Duty titles are in the top 10 most sold games on PS3.
"The Xbox One is almost half as powerful as the PS4" this is not even remotely let alone TECHNICALLY true.
Say whatever you want about DRM, but it's not coming back like how MS originally planned for it. That is a foregone conclusion now.
Don Mattrick is a corporate tool, I'll give you that, but everything else here is the common sensationalist tripe we see on the front page everyday.
How does this stuff get approved?
Be dismissive of what this blog says all you want but the writing is on the walls. There is precedent to back up what has happened, and MS seeks to create precedent for the Future. I've said this all along, Microsoft is bad for gaming. They are, 90% of the time (meaning not always but most of the time), the first to introduce the most anti-consumer/pro-corporate policies and programs into gaming.
They introduced microtransactions and DLC into console gaming. They may not be the only ones to use it, but they created the precedent and set forth the chain of events that has led us to the point where what was once free unlockables is now cut out content being re-sold.
They introduced pay to play online. Many will say "yeah, but look what you get for it." That's not the point. Give them an inch, they take a mile. Are any of you going to say that you are in agreement that you should have to pay for your ISP and then pay Microsoft to access your right to use it? "Bu bu but Sony is now doing it with the PS4." And it's equally wrong, but at least it won't be forced for every game.
They introduced ads in a paid for service. Something that doesn't happen anywhere else. In fact all over the PC market you see "pay to have ads removed and get _____ benefit" but MS doesn't care that you paid for their service, they're still going to shove the ads down your throat and you defend it. Give them an inch and they take a mile.
Microsoft are trying to introduce a camera that can record your vital signs and physical reactions to target ads to you. Disregarding their ties with the NSA and the potential that is there for them to invade your personal life, they are trying to create new ways for people to buy and sell your physical reactions, to annoy you with product placements and ads for a service you paid for and shouldn't have to be subjected to seeing ads.
How anyone can think that this is in our best interest, in gaming's best interests, is a baffling mystery that will never be solved. Give them an inch and they'll take a mile.
Do you really think it's going to get better and Microsoft won't try some new anti-consumer/pro-corporate schemes?