IT World tells how the Vita would fare on the market.
When the PS3 was announced and the arrogance displayed regarding it, I feel the hate was warranted. Hell, I was one of the haters. But the turn around and acknowledgement is something I think gets overlooked. They continue cranking out great games, great services that remain free to access (Netflix, Crackle, Vudu to name a few), yet, the hate just continues (albeit lesser in many respects now). The US gaming media very early this gen was bought by free Live accounts, debug and retail consoles and swag bags (Halo 3 for example). Personally, I couldn't buy a 360 that works and to have been out the expense of Live and not being able to use it, my hate is directed at MS, not the 360. I was literally forced to get a PS3 (if I want to continue to game) and I'm thankful. I can remember the days of firmware 1.3 and how from a feature/function perspective, the 360 trounced the PS3 in almost every way. Now we sit at 4.1 and to be a part of that evolution, is a very cool thing. And I'm still rocking my 60GB without ever having a issue. That says it all. @LOGIC Oh, I agree the price was the primary target of the hate, but it just grew from their. Saying people will want to work more/harder to get a PS3 was just insulting. Like I said, in many respects, the hate was warranted. When I got mine, I was offered money from a woman trying to get one for her son. I too got looks like "WTF", but kinda enjoyed it. I will admit, when I got home and hooked it up, I too was like "WTF" when I couldn't stream from my PC or cross chat.
"When the PS3 was announced and the arrogance displayed regarding it, I feel the hate was warranted. Hell, I was one of the haters." The hate was due more to the price tag than the console itself. When I bought my PS3, practically everyone on the line was staring at me. Then the chick who rang me up tried to entice me to get a 360 instead. It's sad how jealous people get when u buy something expensive.
i think the Sony /brand has more haters than fans these days, this happens over a number of years not overnight. for starters they used to charge premium like Apple do today and those who can't afford will hate. and their were repeated foot-shooting polices like root-kit. and the 4 most important things are: * actually falling behind in tech and innovation to Apple * losing the mass manufacturing edge to Samsung and now even LG, between the time Sony reveal a product and release it to world wide markets, Samsung would have already released various models, for example Sony revealed their Tablet S about a year ago and it isn't in all major markets yet, in contrast Samsung released various sized Tablets and the Galaxy Note. * retail relations and partner ships are behind Samsung and LG, this causes little in store promotions and shelf space one of the most important things in the business (the same thing with the 360 vs PS3 in the US) *like i mentions before the thing with the root-kit and hacker hunt after the PS3 security was compromised made it many enemies in the Tech world, who go hard on Sony products in Reviews. the reviews are also influenced by brand fanbyiesm.
Not just consumers but journalists too. If journalists are gamers, as we're led to believe, then they're sure to have preferences, likes and dislikes like the rest of us... while trying to remains "professional". * First was the hate on the price tag. Even though the PS3 was the cheapest Blu-ray player at the time + gaming console with free online gaming system. * Then it was all about "sales". Haters didn't want or think the system would sell. But it did. When PS3 launched, 360 had about 8mil units from the head start. That gap has been cut to only 2 or 3 mil. So unfortunately for the haters, PS3 sells faster. * Then it was all about games. And the sheep-like claims that PS3 had "no games" started, while ignoring titles like Ratchet and Clank, Uncharted, Heavenly Sword, MotorStorm, Resistance, etc, which came out in its first year. * Haters didn't want PS3 to have exclusives. For example, they wanted PS3 to lose MGS4 to 360 which never happened. And instead, 360 lost other exclusives to the PS3, including XBL Arcade games and disc based games. * At first Microsoft and their following criticized the PS3 for being "too media centric" and "lack of focus in games". Which funnily enough, it's exactly what Microsoft has been doing with the Xbox more and more recently. Sony kept adding new features to the PS3 for free, while Microsoft increased the price and focused less on games while the PS3 came out with a barrage of games. It's like karma from 2006/7 coming back to bite haters in the a**.
Dude, if that chick tried to talk me into buying a 360 i would have said: B*tch, please those sandwiches arent going to make themselves.
ken kutaragi telling people to get a second job if they cant afford a ps3 isnt arrogance but a helpful tip. would people have rathered he say to go and steal the money to buy a ps3. people love to hate especially things they cant afford so theyll justify the hate by harping on silly things . to each his own, if people want quality they often times have to pay more.
Exactly. I pulled some extra hours at my job and managed to easily afford a PS3. You can either do that or save up. People have spent a lot of money on worst things. ____ @DarthSidious If you can't elaborate on why buying a PS3 is foolish for gamers, then you qualify in the haters and/or delusional fanboys category from my previous comment.
I love my PS3, bought it at launch, wtill don't own a 360...... I would, however, buy one for Halo.
Is everybody forgetting the 360's $400 price tag at launch? $400 for a DVD based video game system (PS2) that had a small a$$ HDD (Xbox). Both features that were not improved upon form the previous gen. No WiFi, No HDMI 1.3, No non proprietary accessories (like being able to swap a SATA HDD to upgrade your system), hardware reliability issues, etc. etc. You people are blinded by your Sony hate ... you just mask it with ignorance. For $100 more you got a Blu Ray playing based Video Game system, Bigger (and easily upgradable) HDD, Internet Hub, more reliable hardware, free online play, etc. etc. They had Youtube, Hulu, etc. first. They also recently gave owners a huge cookie in sending out a firmware update making everyone's PS3 a 3d player ... that's like Sony giving people a free $200 upgrade. Just in how much I HAVEN'T paid in XBOX LIVE Fees ($50 per year) I've saved $200 dollars. Take that away from my initial cost and a PS3 is down to $400 where that $400 360 has now cost you $600.... funny isn't it? You people are out of your mind or have completely lied to yourself so much that you believe it to be true if you ever thought 360 to be a better value. And with that said ... how has that HD-DVD investment you made working out considering that M$ made you buy an add on player instead of putting it in the system. M$ are the biggest money gougers ever, and people keep forking over money like drones.
She tried to entice you to get a 360 because the Ps3 was a huge waste of money at the time. The best game you could play on it was the resistance demo. I don't think people were jealous, they were just amazed at how much money you'd wasted. And yes, Sony was unbelievably arrogant when the Ps3 was first released, as well as having an insulting price for the Ps3.
@jeseth They are forgetting the $400 price tag - I bought one, they are forgetting the cost when you add 4-5 years of Live (there is something to be mad about, pay to play Multiplayer), they are forgetting the lack of built in wireless, they are forgetting the wonderful last generation disc format, they are forgetting being told to buy an HD DVD add on for which MS dropped support, ran, and then publicly said they had nothing to do with backing the HD DVD format, they are forgetting the countless deaths of 360s which was the biggest hardware debacle in the history of gaming, they are forgetting the DRM issue that plagued everyone who received a different 360 after service and the fact it took over a year to patch - and still didn't solve all of the issues, We can go on and on about this. The fact is no one can match 360 supporters when it comes to putting their head down and charging ahead no matter what the facts happen to be. They'll forgive MS any transgression yet hate Sony over a console most do not even own.
It is so ignorant adding the cost of Live to the 360. Has it occured to you that people actually enjoy Live and it's ease of use? Many people would pay $50 a year if Sony offered the same quality of service. The hypocrisy in justifying a more expensive "quality" console is almost absurd when in the next sentence a higher quality online experience is considered a horrible concept. Maybe it's the stupidity of the hardcore fans that give either console a bad image. -Death
This whole gen is filled with anti-micro and anti-Sony driven media, only a fanboy would really think its one sided. Dont forget about nintendo too, prior to the massive success of the wii, many blasted the wii for going the path of motion vs HD, but of course fanboys have selective memory. Instead of all the crying try being objective for once, truth is while many complaints /issues are unfounded there ARE many complaints against both over these last few years that at the very least for a period of time were indeed valid, if not for you personaly then they were valid concerns for millions of other consumers, thats a fact and where I come from its news worthy.... thus a news piece questioning ps3 price tag or 360's failure rate, or ps3 exec's arrogance, ps3 delays or 360's lack of variety, or 360's new direction with kinect, etc, etc, YES it was indeed legit no matter how much loyal fanboys wanted them to go away. lol the fact that both console have overcome their faults or succeeded where some thought they would fail does not make said criticism unwarranted in fact many times its because of the negative attention that both companies have adapted and made positive changes for the benefit of their fanbase. n4g folks always seem to talk as if they live in a bubble, clearly there are lots of "blogs" and some big name sites all over the net who have clearly crossed the line into sensational journalism but that's life the media after all is a business and nothing draws "easy" hits, traffic, ratings like negative gossip news, I mean seriously what do you think will be the biggest headline when Kobe raises 1 mil for a youth charity or when he gets caught cheating with some skank in a Colorado hotel?... here's a hint ask Tiger. If anything its us gamers who blow almost every nonchalant comment out of context, for instance a few days ago the dev for Reckoning simply stated ps3 is harder to develop for and fanboys for and against ps3 went nuts, when the comment itself doesn't mean much other than stating a fact from his experience, hell the least either side could do is wait to see whether both games actually look and perform well with neglible differences before attacking or proclaiming victory. The bottom line is they both receive their fair share of hate, some justified some unjustified but clearly its how we react to it that is the biggest problem, outside of this dreamworld we call n4g I know lots of gamers of all backgrounds and never once has any of them told me they will or won't support a game or console based solely off what they saw on the news or read on the internet. Some of you give the media waaay to much credit.
Actually, it's not ignorant at all. To get full functionality out of your 360, Live is required. And Live is not free. At least, not the useful version. To reverse what you've said, the hypocrisy in justifying a more expensive "quality" online is almost absurd when in the next sentence a higher quality console is considered a horrible concept. You might argue, "Why not include Plus in the cost of owning a PS3?" And that's easy to answer: not having Plus doesn't lock you out of any core functions of the PS3. Not having Live means no online at all. Whether you enjoy it or not is irrelevant; it's still an extra charge. I mean, to reverse your own statement again: maybe people enjoy using their PS3? Is that not justification enough for its price?
Listen I wish Live was free just as much as the next guy but given the choice of quiting Live and making psn my primary mode of online gaming its going to be paying for Live without hesitation, no different from those who easily decided to buy the more expensive ps3 vs the cheaper 360. Now don't misinterpret my preference as blind fanboyism but as just simple reality of my circumstances because while I think Live is the better overall online service psn is still pretty good and great for online gaming but the fact is Live is more social community for me because most of my friends and family back home have a 360, we started with Live and it allows us to stay connected, which makes Live worth every penny to me. Millions of people usually don't pay for something they could get for free so the fact that millions of gamers have NOT dropped Live and went to psn means they enjoy what it offers more so than the "free" online service.
I think there is a lot of hate directed at Sony from the media and N4G really puts that in the spotlight. The reasoning isn’t clear. Is there any actual numbers that show what N4G actually does actually give a significant boost by writing a negative Sony article? I think saying it's just sensationalist journalism is still speculation. To me it seems like the bigger sites and more mainstream sites hate on Sony more, the smaller sites are more likely to go after anyone. @Jokesonyou -About n4g users living in a bubble – I don’t think this is a very good argument. N4G has a very large variety of sources/authors across the web, the people here are not in a bubble they are quite the opposite. Other game sites would be more restrictive of outside views because they are restricted to a hand full of editors telling them the story. Your situation with having lots of friends and family on xbox live is fair, but you have to understand that because of that you will have some bias. Your family and friends are all invested in the console. I would say the same thing for myself but the opposite; my family/friends have PS3s. I think your sense of value for each console is skewed, as is mine, we're all human. -About insinuating the number of live users means those people fundamentally chose to pay for live - It’s hard to say that, many of these people simply chose a 360 because it’s what their friends have or it was cheaper than the PS3. After they’ve bought a console they have no choice but to pay for live, it’s not an option (unless they want to lose a lot of money buying two consoles or not play CoD). It’s hard to know how many of these people actually knew the differences about paying for online and features between the two consoles. Honestly I think this gen said a lot about average purchasers and how uninformed they actually are. The average person thinks game console, initial cost, and what its purpose is; they rarely go into depth thinking about paying for online, which console produces more exclusive games, graphics, dependability ect. ect. The media isn't helping with this.
Do we get to pick and choose what full functionality means? To get the "full HD" experience, I had to buy a new 1080p tv. Does this add to the cost of the PS3? What about all the Blu-rays I had to buy to get full use? Those are extra too? Not everyone plays online. I agree it sounds crazy. I'm pretty confidant that the 60-70 million Xbox 360 owners knew that Live was a subscription based service. Perhaps Live is actually the reason many choose The Xbox over PS3. It always seems odd that Sony fans can't acknowledge something might actually be better on another console. Instead they just scratch their heads on disbelief and assume the rest of the world is stupid. -Death
You can be bias while at least attempting to remain objective. You misunderstand I'm not saying n4g members don't have acess to other sources what I'm saying is a large majority of them seem to conveniently ignore any info critical of their console of choice and when looking at past issues their memory is very selective, for example many make wild claims without any shred of links to creditable info, Im 100% confident for every negative post/article you could dig up about ps3, I could find 1 or more for the360, and Id put money on it, yet a majority of sony loyal folks choose to ignore this which is why I believe they definitely display BEHAVIOR of one who lives in a bubble, hell at least the guy who really does live in a bubble BELIEVES the sky is purple because he can't walk outside and look for himself, as for why sony folks display this hive-like mind that the media is out to get them, when evidence of the media overdramatizing, slandering, hyping, sensationalizing, gossiping, etc about anything and everyone for the sake of ratings is all around us and easy to find with a quick google search, ......my best guest is that not all but many of them simply are too sensitive, perhaps immature all mixed with a heavy dose of fanboy koolaid which clouds their objectivity.
This generation gamers hate everything and I personally think its the media's fault, more specifically "internet journalists". Everything is "pitted against each and everything is analysed/critized to no end, it always has a negative overtone. All of this negative energy just spills over to all of the people who enjoy whatever is being slandered at that moment. Sony this gen just seems to have the weirdest critisms placed upon them, things that just don't make sense.
+Bubbles for intelligence and being the voice of truth.
I can definitely agree with you there. Every console or handheld released are met with Doom n Gloom articles... It is as if the "gaming" journalists are against gaming itself.
"This generation gamers hate everything and I personally think its the media's fault, more specifically "internet journalists"." Is it the "media's fault" or the fault of the gamers who consistently buy into what the media says? I see a lot of diffusion of responsibility in this thread. If YOU hate on things constantly...thats YOUR fault. People are negative because they CHOOSE to be negative. If you see someone shoot someone on tv, then you do it in real life, is that the fault of the guy on the tv...or YOUR fault? Same concept here. If a journalist's negativity flows on to you and you start acting in a similar manner...whose fault is it? Seriously...common sense much? Media this, media that...what about YOU? What planet do you people live in where self-responsibility doesn't exist?
@LOGICWINS He didn't say he buys into it, he said that he thinks the mass market buys into it and that the media exploits it. He can hardly go around persuading everyone to not buy into it, can he? A general air of "everyone is out to get my favourite things" will cause people to argue back, the shooting someone because you see it on tv is in no way relevant.
"Media this, media that...what about YOU? What planet do you people live in where self-responsibility doesn't exist?" SOooo the media has no blame at all? Have you heard of the term instigate? Does the media not instigate the hate? When you have articles like http://xbox360.ign.com/arti... Does it not instigate the hate among the two groups? Now, I'm not saying that gamers aren't at fault in their own hate, but the media sure as hell plays a role.
The media has a huge role in how things are percieved. They write reviews and articles on products before people make the investment. Not too many people have the disposable income to just take chances on new electronics or buy $60 video games blindly. People read reviews and make decisions based on their own knowledge and the critical reviews. This gen has taking a lot of the fun out of games. Picking apart some games faults and giving poor scores for certain titles but not holding other titles to those standards. For example, look at Skyrim. It has screen tearing, pop ins, crazy bugs (my character was stuck running diagonally last night, also spinning in circles), and overall performance issues. Most games would be crucified for the amount of issues Skyrim had at launch ... but it get's 9's across the board even though it really didn't do much more than Fallout 3 except have the fantasy setting of The Elder Scrolls. Examples like that are whats wrong with journalism. They rag on PS3 launch @ $600 but its not an issue that 360 launched @ $4oo but had nothing new from the previous gen. PS2 was DVD based and Xbox had an HDD. The media plays a huge role.
Good points.. Except for the arrogance, microsoft crashed ps3 launch parties in very childish ways, bragged about sales lead, size of catalog, xbl etc but for whatever reason sony recieved all the hate... In regards to the price I think its odd though because I was elated to buy a ps3 at $600.. For me the gaming, free psn, and blu ray functionality was more then enough to warrant the price tag.. In fact I spent $740 on my launch ps3 which included a game, controller, and an hdmi cable.. I really don't know why everybody blew up over the price especially considering that out of the box the ps3 had more console features like and hdmi port, 4 usb ports, upgradeable hard drives, built in wifi adaptor, sd and micro memory card slots, and free psn access.. I honestly think that hate was unwarranted
Next generation begins when we (sony) say it does... http://www.neowin.net/news/...
@LX where does it say that? Anyways ken did say a lot weird things in that era, hence, they removed him.
I never really was bothered by the perceived arrogance anyway. PR, in essence, is self promotion...and isn't that by it's very nature arrogance? Sure, Ken said some things that might have been perceived as arrogant. However, in my opinion, it was just the same grandstanding that occurs in every PR promotion. As Moparful stated, it was really about the perception of the PS3 being too pricey. In hind sight, think of trying to build a comparable system in the Xbox 360 (with wireless adapter and the ill-fated HD-DVD) and you would have been over the $600 price point AND still be paying for XBL. Actually, adding 5 years worth of XBL puts you at around an extra $250 (not accounting for discounts on the yearly subscriptions).
Agreed... nuff' said.
The irony is that now, SONY's EMPLOYEES are the ones that need second jobs.
Because Sony as a company is in trouble.
Erm... no! No, I don't think they need second jobs at all.
Seriously? Sony is having trouble and their current employees all took pay cuts? The answer is: Stupid comment, Frankfurt/DarthSidious.
Ignored for being a troll.
Lets just say this the media and good marketing are keeping the 360 ahead in the US. It is that simple. The rest of the world is the reverse. If you look at the NA market and see what is happening even within Sony Europe is getting more love and more marketing dollars. The emphasis of the Vita launch should go where they have greater market share and Sony is climbing in Europe and is King in Japan for HD consoles. NA however is the biggest market and that is the only reason Microsoft is still in the race and making a new console. Without the live subscription revenue I bet you some executives might have looked at what other companies are doing in their hardware business and call the 360 a slight failure. There were a lot of deals made and money spent to market the system as heavily as they do in the States and that is good. However, PS3 with a year less time is right on their heels, and Nintendo surpassed them aswell. They know that they have to think their strategy through and from the looks of it they are going with a power Wii U with a better Kinect integration. Depending on how you look at things you can view things differently. Microsoft will have it harder next gen for sure and so will Sony. We are at a point where Heavy rain, Killzone and Uncharted graphics are here and now. Nintendo based on rumors has hardware that is more powerful than the PS3. This is something that Nintendo has never had in a while a system that regardless of the specs at this point their games will look impressive because they have always done more with less like Sony has aswell but the franchise history is on Nintendo's side. Unless Microsoft and Sony can make our eyes bleed with cutting edge graphical prowess Nintendo can take the next gen like they did this one. A perfect looking Zelda game without jaggies and wise art direction to keep the polygon count down. We always were at the point this gen where art direction was more important than polygon pushing but going forward it is going to be very important. I might like the Wii U I am not going to lie I hope that the table gets multitouch and better resolution but Nintendo has tried and true franchises. Like I have always said though if Sony still had even just the Crash license this gen and even the last gen would have had Nintendo on the ropes. Crash's first 3 games and CTR are best of class to this very day and playable and fun. That is what Sony is missing. They filled the Halo void with KZ and Resistance but you cannot fill the Mario void. I think that UC and GOW can tango with Zelda. But nothing can stop Mario except a ND Crash game.
I don't even think the price was as big of a deal as what happened in the aftermath of the launch. "Delaystation" was used all over N4G at the time. Followed by the games that PS3 did get were either multiplats reviewed worse than the 360, or exclusives that didn't look like the Killzone 2 trailer. I personally believe the Killzone 2 CG trailer messed up alot of things. It was like people expected every single game the PS3 released to look like that, so every game was graded based on that expectation. And then the unfair reviews. Resistance vs. Gears of War comparisons, Ratchet and Clank "too much variety", Heavenly Sword "a female Kratos who can't jump", every game "we don't need SixAxis", PS3 would receive new features while 360 fans would constantly say "you can have new features and avatars etc, but we play games". Now all of a sudden, people are excited for custom avatars, new console features, and less games. I don't know what else Sony can do now, but I've been around from the beginning and the media constantly flip-flops when it comes to what Sony is doing right and wrong. The one thing I'll say is, Sony's advertising has gone down a bit after GT5 released. The only worthwhile commercial that has come out after that is the "Michael" commercial. No PS Vita commercial during the Super Bowl, but I saw a 360 Kinect commercial. I seriously don't know how no one likes Playstation anymore with the success of PS1 and PS2 had. It's like the gaming world has been MIB mind zapped and the 360 Kinect is that Riddler machine in Batman Forever that mind drained everyone into hating PS3. Sure it had a slow start, but it's been caught up for awhile now.
"Saying people will want to work more/harder to get a PS3 was just insulting." This is true, but it wasn't just arrogance it was on paper a fact they believed. Maybe its an age thing, but I remember $1000 vcr's and $3000 receivers. I had older family and friends that would look through catalogs, find the sony product they wanted, saved for it, waited for 2 more generations to release from sony then the receiver that they wanted that originally cost $3k was now roughly $1k. Why? Because sony was always future proofing their hardware. Sony recievers were the first to have hdmi ports if i remember correctly way before the ps3 or 360 were even announced. a $600 video game console that also could be a low end pc running linux, with web access built in blu ray and many more features for those that used other sony products like cameras? coming from a time when people were paying over $1k for vcrs, that was a steal in a lot of ways for the adult tech geek that knew technology. LOL i'm actually reading people say that they want the ps4 to be more powerful than the 720 and cost less... lol who comes up with that? a third grader who does't understand tech or economics? sony was wrong for stating it but wasn't wrong for thinking it.
The haters are running out of ammunition against the PS3. First it was 'it has no games'. Then it was 'it's too pricey.' Then it was 'the exclusives don't sell and therefore exclusives don't matter. Then it was 'America equals the world'. I applaud Sony for bringing out quality games and stepping up to the plate instead of listening to these naysayers. As 'arrogant' as everyone wanted to believe they were, they did turn things around in the end. Instead of focusing on negatives, the media should put their foot in their mouth and look at the success and what the PS3 accomplished so far.
@Sony360 - If you know how much the PS3 cost to MAKE at launch, you'd understand that the price they asked was nowhere near "arrogant". And Resistance was a great first gen game, I remember comparing it to Halo 3 and thinking, WTF Resistance looks better and it's a f***ing launch title. And it had a great online. R2 and R3 were not as good in terms of gameplay imo.
Gamers like to hate everything. COD, Kinect, XBL not being free, Uncharted's linearity, Dante's hair not being white, the PSN outage etc.
People in general like to hate everything FTFY :)
There are even fanboys who hate on the Vitas box design which I find stupid. They say comments like this. " Sony Rips you off by not including a paper manual with the game" " The Vitas boxes are too small, I might end up loosing them" XperiaRay
"COD, Kinect, XBL not being free, Uncharted's linearity, Dante's hair not being white, the PSN outage" Well about half of those have realistic criticisms against them, so......I know some gamers like to classify all criticism as "HATERZZZ!", but let's be realistic here. Or maybe even "LOGICal".
But some of things have reasons for being "hated" on COD - It;s changed the industry where developers will do what COD does in their online games to try and get it's sales even though they will never achieve them and runing their online in the process, oh and they tack online on aswell for the sake of it. It's also made developers/gamers think of average selling games as failures because they don't sell as well as COD. Lets not forget the game dosen't add anything new each year it's released even though games where developers have worked their arses off to imrpove a sequel a ton get average sales and the same marks as COD in reviews. Eurogamers Uncharted 3/Gears of War 3 review, they got 8 while MW3 got 8....I know I know differen't genres but still the point remains. Kinect - MS don't give a crap about core gamers anymore, they'd rather go where the money is instead of caring about the fanbase they already have and got them to where they are today. I could ramble about this for ages but best not.... XBL not being free - Easy one...the PSN have a free online and hardly any adverts, XBL is full of them and we still have to pay.....come on thats BS Dantes hair not being white - Like so many ignorant people, it's NOT BECAUSE OF THE HAIR, if you look deeper into it theres a ton of reasons why people are "hating" on the game, the hair issue is just one of the many problems about the game
"It;s changed the industry where developers will do what COD does in their online games to try and get it's sales even though they will never achieve them and runing their online in the process" Thats not COD's fault. Its the developers fault for not having the balls to follow their OWN vision. If a kid decides to shoot up their school because they saw killing in GTA...is it GTA's fault or the kid's fault? You can't blame a leader for having followers. "MS don't give a crap about core gamers anymore" There were more 360 games sold last year than PS3 games..even though the PS3 has more "core exclusives". What does this tell you? Multiplatform games are games too and according to the numbers, 360 AND PS3 gamers would rather buy multiplatform games as opposed to core exclusives "Easy one...the PSN have a free online and hardly any adverts, XBL is full of them and we still have to pay.....come on thats BS" Easy one...first of all, if $3 a month is too much for you to stomach, then your in the wrong hobby. Second, XBL is a more integrated online network than PSN. Faster downloads, downloades while the system is off etc. XBL also has more weekly activity than PSN. Why o why are more people gaming on a paid service than a free one? facepalm/ "Like so many ignorant people, it's NOT BECAUSE OF THE HAIR" Of course its not only the hair. It was a hyperbole. Genius much? Furthermore, its a REBOOT, hence some things are SUPPOSED to change. You don't like it, don't buy it.
I'm afraid I'm with Billy here. LOGICWINS really is usually a logical thinker and often the voice of reason. However here he's churning out false facts, blatant bias and being a general ass. I really hope you go back to your old self as a self-respecting commenter who has the authority to put people in their /rightful/ place.
LOGIC was right about devs following COD though. They do need to set their own path. Even Killzone plays like COD now. Battlefield as well with the ground combat.
@LOGICWINS...It's really not the developer's fault that the gold standard for development is COD. Consumers drive the market. They drive the demand. In the end, publishers bankroll and green-light the projects that will make them money. They are in business after all. I am sure that there are many, many talented developers with brilliant ideas for new and interesting IP's. However, the risk with new IP's is that they won't make the same kind of cash as what has been proven to make cash...COD. As for your point about the multiplatform games. You are missing another option. The saturation of the market with the more casual gamer. It's the Bieber effect. I am not saying that Justin Bieber sucks (I actually haven't ever heard an entire song of his). However, many casual music listeners have determined that there is a demand for his sound. Translate that to games. Casual gamers are a bit less discerning about gaming.
"LOGICWINS really is usually a logical thinker and often the voice of reason" Noooooooooooooo. He's rarely a voice of reason and hardly a logical thinker. He's the same ranting commenter like he was under his old account. Starts with D.
@ LOGICWINS The 360 downloads software when its turned off? I mean, its either ON or OFF. If your telling me I can start a download on the 360, turn off the system, and unplug it (because it doesnt need to be plugged in if its off), you can shut up and take my money RIGHT NOW.
Here we go again. Mr.KnowItAll Logicwins arguing against people who make good points all the while contradicting himself in the process. Logic you are missing the point of Pampoovey's post. His point was that gamers have REASONS for hating on some of the things you mentioned that gamers hate on. You make it seems like it's wrong for gamers to express their dislike for something when you have no problem complaining about how expensive the Vita is. "Thats not COD's fault. Its the developers fault for not having the balls to follow their OWN vision." Of course it's not LITERALLY CoD's fault, but that doesn't mean people are crazy or stupid for placing the blame on COD though. You can't blame developers for wanting to gain CoD's success yet like you said it's their fault for not following their own vision. It's not black and white like you make it out to be. People cane make very strong cases for both sides. The main point is though that people have REASONS for hating CoD. It's not just because they like to or it's "cool" to or whatever reason you think they do. "There were more 360 games sold last year than PS3 games..even though the PS3 has more "core exclusives". What does this tell you? Multiplatform games are games too and according to the numbers, 360 AND PS3 gamers would rather buy multiplatform games as opposed to core exclusives" You didn't even respond to what you quoted... "MS don't give a crap about core gamers anymore" I fail to see how you pointed out that MS does care about core gamers... Nonetheless, there are more muliplatform games than there are exclusive games hence the reason why multiplats out sell exclusives... And I CAN'T BELIEVE you said that the numbers mean that people would rather buy multiplats instead of exclusives... I guess Sony and Microsoft should not make another exclusive game because you know we would rather buy multiplats instead lol? "XBL also has more weekly activity than PSN. Why o why are more people gaming on a paid service than a free one?" Missing the point again. For people that don't use all of the features that XBL has they are simply getting ripped off. Thus they have a REASON to hate on XBL not having a bare bones free membership... What is also funny is that you said gamers like to hate on XBL not being free, yet you are quick to point out that more people game on XBL, then how is it that gamers like to hate on it when the majority are gaming on it? Don't tell me you based that statement off of the comments on N4G. You of ALL people should know that N4G is not equivalent to the world LOL!!! "Of course its not only the hair. It was a hyperbole. Genius much? Furthermore, its a REBOOT, hence some things are SUPPOSED to change. You don't like it, don't buy it." First off this has more to do with the fans than it is gamers. Funny how you have no trouble taking people's comments seriously and literally, yet when other take yours literally, you question their intelligence... Granted it is a reboot and things are suppose to change, but are people wrong for expressing their dislike with those changes? I'm pretty sure that those that are complaining about the DMC reboot do not plan on buying it so there is no need to state the obvious...
"Logic you are missing the point of Pampoovey's post. His point was that gamers have REASONS for hating on some of the things you mentioned that gamers hate on" Thank you, I was about to go on a massive rant when I read his comment but you've basicaly summed everything up nicely in a well mannered way... So for everyone looking at this comment...thats basicaly what I would of proberly been trying to get at if I had replied.
It's not fun to hate? ;)
It is not the point that gamers like to hate on everything, which would include that they hate anything they own. Does that even make sense? The more logical thing to say would be that anything can be hated by humans. With that you can bring in any topic or idea. This is all possible because of perception.
. I expect the vita to do very well despite numerous of articles stating that gaming on a smartphone/tablet is more ideal because frankly, if you think gaming on a smartphone is better than gaming on a Vita then the Vita is for you in the first place.
Gamers love to hate sony? I need a source as most gamers had a ps1.
Nobody is saying that Gamers ALWAYS hated Sony. But if you think that gamers and "journalists" enjoy scrutinizing Sony way more than others these days, you're a bit naive. As far as the PS1 goes, you can attribute it's success to one of the age-old rule of life: Everybody loves an underdog.
@ash_divine My comment was more off the cuff you said it better than i intended to bubbles.
Honestly, like Sumo, when the PS3 was shown at E3 05, I cringed quite a bit, but not only about price point, but the arrogance. Saying things like "the next gen doesn't start until we say it does" and "you need to get 2 jobs to get the best gaming experience available" didn't really set right with me. When it finally launched, the games weren't really up to snuff, except for a few gems and the PS3 was getting a thrashing from the media and fanboys left and right, and lets not forget the doom and gloom articles. Looks like the Vita is getting the same treatment. Didn't look good for a minute there, but then Sony started getting their s*** together. They hardly get any props for that. Fast forward to 2012, and I couldn't be happier with what Sony has done, but some people just can't let bygones be bygones. Honestly, I own all 3 system, but besides a few 360 games that I enjoy, Sony seems to have the only console that actually have gamers in mind then their bottom line. I seriously don't know where a lot of this Sony hate is coming from this late in the game. It's cool to have your own preferences, but don't trash other people because they don't share yours.
You summed it up very well. Bubbles to you. I personally wish i could afford all consoles, its games and services, but I don't have a job, let alone 2 jobs. So I think PS3/PC is a good enough encompassing combo for me as a gamer. If XBL was free, I might have a 360 right now. To me, that's unacceptable. I agree that what Sony said was arrogant, but did I go and buy PS3 at that price? Nope, I didn't get a second job... I waited and used my savings to get one after it's first price drop in 2008. Sony's arrogance never affected my passion for their games, and probably never will. Sony never lost focus - only the scope of what certain users expected such as their network features. For games, they've been truly "right on" since 2008. But yeah, just take a look at the consoles and it's evident that Sony is the company with gamers in mind foremost, at least for now... "That's preposterous, don't be a fanboy" people will say. However, look at their current state as a company. Posting billions in losses over the past couple of years. They don't make mammoth numbers on most of their exclusives, yet they keep pumping them out. Fresh ideas, new IPs every year and sequels to beloved franchises - both mainstream and niche. Variety. Choice. For the gamer? For themselves? Both are relevant but they could sell their studios and focus on their most successful franchises like Microsoft. But they don't... Even recently a Sony spokesperson said "We should probably make less games". Yet, they don't. And that's what I respect. Like you said people just need to "let bygones be bygones", but it seems some people are too bitter to let it be. On the other side, some more serious issues exist, but they'd rather sweep it under the carpet and focus on irrelevant issues that Sony are having.
I'm sorry but, I think Sony was right about the next generation starting when they say it does! If can just step back and thing about what they ment and not how it sounded, you'll see that they were actually right! For example; 360 DvD Small hdd space not interchangeable Component and composite wiring visual out 2.4 wireless PS3 Blu Ray HDMI other Os Bluetooth flash drives Easy interchangeable HDD Just to name a few things. And the then the games! MS might have talked a good game about down loadable games but, PS3 had the first full game that was both retail and online! Personally, Up until this finnal rendition the 360, MS had been playing catch on the hareware and on some unique software IP's as well. Noooow, could sony have put it a different way.......YES! But, like almost always, Sony has lead in innovation when it comes to counsels.
People believe this and that. In other words, for the very same reasons with what you have stated, someone can use the same to believe in the exact opposite conclusion. This goes to say that no matter what we may deem logical or sensible, people will believe in what they want. The conclusion of the majority does not mean that it is a universal idea.
I remember when I was the only one out of my group of friends who bought a PS3. They laughed and taunted me over it (i had a 360 as well). Now they're al envious but at the same time they don't seem to want to go out and purchase one.
I couldn't have said this any better. I'm not quite sure why people are so riled to continue fighting against a GOOD gaming company (the only one in my eyes who supports the "gamer").
Really feels like the "hate" comes from the PC/360 crowd. With the Xbox camp especially, they were already gearing up to hate the PS2 successor no matter what. The launch price just made it easier.
Are you serious? The Playstation brand was the strongest it has ever been in 2005-2006. MS was the underdog and the original Xbox was a laughing stock. Nobody though MS was serious.... Heck, one look at the comments above yours and it is clear where the "hate" is directed.