EXVirtual (User)

  • Contributor
  • 4 bubbles
  • 5 in CRank
  • Score: 29460
""

'Competition is good for the industry' is not 100% true.

EXVirtual | 380d ago
User blog

Just to clarify, I'm a PlayStation and Nintendo fan.

I've seen a lot of people say 'The sooner Microsoft exits the industry, the better.' and I completely agree. Microsoft have done a lot of things that have not been good for the industry at all. I'll explain that later on. People who say that that MS needs to leave the industry, including myself, have been replied to with this statement: 'No, competition is good for the industry', and maybe a 'your just another fanboy' on top. I'm no fanboy, but I'm a huge fan of PlayStation and Nintendo. There is a bit of a bias (everyone has one) but I'm not letting that bias blind me. I want to explain why that statement is a not completely correct.

First off, you guys are making it sound like Sony and Microsoft or the only ones in this console race. You're forgetting one highly important company. Nintendo! The same company that has some of the most relevant 1st party franchises in gaming. That's not to say something like Uncharted and Halo aren't popular, but you can't deny that Mario is way more popular. Fair enough Nintendo aren't doing so hot right now, but if they have a decent restructuring, they can put the Wii U in the position that the 3DS is in right now.

I've said this before, but bad competitors do not do the industry any good at all. They make it worse. MS has been using the cheapest tactics in the book to make them seem better. Paying 3rd party publishers not to show PS4 games at E3, using high end PCs at E3, raiding the Nintendo Best Buy experience and damage controlling on sites like Reddit. Does that make you a good competitor? No.

You know what I said about MS doing things that aren't good for the industry?
Moneyhats, gimped multiplats, making too many games multiplats, encouraging the over saturation of FPS'. With the Xbox One, they tried to implement DRM and too much of a focus on multimedia (Sony tried it with the PS3, but it in the end, the PS3 has more exclusives than the 360, as the 360 did start focusing too much on multimedia). Yes I know they introduced the online pay wall, but Sony is doing it with the PS4. Fair enough PS+ is a good deal, but it's still a pay wall.

Anyone who was trying to defend MS because of the DRM from day 1 and says what MS was doing is the future is completely wrong. I don't want to require internet to play games. I don't want to be forced to get digitally copies. I want freedom. That's what consoles are for. Give me the choice to sit down wait for a game to download. Give me the choice to go out and buy the physical version of the game. Give me the ability to go offline with digitally downloaded games. Sony and Nintendo seem to understand that. MS don't. Look at CD's. Downloading music off of ITunes has been around for years, but CD's are still around and can be easily found. That simple.

Microsoft are just not good for the industry. I guess with the original Xbox and in some cases the 360 have put Sony and Nintendo where they are today, but they're not needed anymore.

dedicatedtogamers  +   380d ago
I agree. I think the phrase should be amended to say "GOOD competition is good for the industry". Microsoft has not been healthy for any industry that they've entered.
PopRocks359  +   380d ago
Microsoft's policy has been nothing short of backwards and is constantly compared to Sony's actions back in 2006. Overpriced hardware, needless features and a severe lack of communication with the fans of gaming who, you know, are there to hype the crap out of their games and spread word of their new products.

Nintendo keeps certain positive older traits alive in the industry, such as maintaining local multiplayer, no shady DLC practices and fully developed and lengthy game development.

Sony are pioneers who push video game technology as far as possible and throw in some unique and mature alternatives; they are to Dreamworks' Antz as Nintendo is to Pixar's A Bug's Life.

Microsoft is that obscure inbetweener no one cares for right now. In fact, I'd go so far as to say that lately they are the Uwe Boll of the industry.

Edit: Also TV.
#1.1 (Edited 380d ago ) | Agree(14) | Disagree(16) | Report | Reply
PopRocks359  +   380d ago
Four disagrees? Come on guys, at least provide a retort of some kind if you're going to click that disagree button.
HonestDragon  +   380d ago
Well, count me as someone who agrees with you and dedicatedtogamers. Microsoft's policies were asinine to say the least. Microsoft has been (in my opinion) holding back the industry. I mean, paying more for internet services? Motion gaming with Kinect? The all-in-one entertainment gimmick with the Xbox One?

No thank you. I prefer to have games for my game console. I don't want some bulky VCR with a creepy camera sitting in my living room. That is why I'm sticking with Wii U and PS4. Even then, I still have my PS3. Bottom line is this: I want a game console, not a box that can do things my PC or DVR can already do.
Erudito87  +   380d ago
really comparing ms to sony? sony has historically added a good level of convergence as they are an all round company and like to combine different stuff in their console.
r1sh12  +   380d ago
@Dedicatedtogamers.. Without MS and XBL PSN would not have existed, gamers would not have been playing around the world via a connected service.

MS has done some great things, recently they have been terrible but Sony have been just as bad.
nosferatuzodd  +   380d ago
hello Sega was the one who made that possible with the dreamcast after Sega tank Microsoft take most of the ppl who work for Sega so come Xbox live was born they didn't created online play they watch what other ppl do then flew in like a vulture look at their track record watch apple ipod Zune tank apple TV Xbox one is a apple TV in disguise
#1.2.1 (Edited 380d ago ) | Agree(0) | Disagree(2) | Report
nosferatuzodd  +   380d ago
I totally agree it goes even farther than what you've explained they've paid someone a hundred and 30 million dollars to debunk and crash Google and it didn't work when it comes to evil and unscrupulous act Microsoft top the chart then pay people to talk bad about android and Samsung on Facebook and it back fired miserably karma is a bitch all they do is wait and watch you invent something and has soon has its successful they jump in like the vulture they are
people may think I'm hating on Xbox but its not Xbox i hate its Microsoft very shady company coming from a demon who suppose to be deceitful is saying a lot..
Zodd the immortal
#1.3 (Edited 380d ago ) | Agree(0) | Disagree(1) | Report | Reply
coolbeans  +   379d ago
"GOOD competition is good for the industry".

That actually confuses the message rather than helping since "good" can be separated into several different categories:

-Ideas/features that pushed the industry in a new direction
-Sustainability
-"Benevolence" to the consumer
-Value
-etc.

Coming up with some scale of what you would define as "good competition" just becomes arbitrary and senseless to attempt in comparison to the tried-and-true statement: "competition is good for the industry." It's that plain and simple.
#1.4 (Edited 379d ago ) | Agree(0) | Disagree(0) | Report | Reply
NeverEnding1989  +   380d ago
Remember PS2 online? Or PSN in 2006? It was horrible. HORRIBLE.

Xbox Live made online gaming happen on consoles. If you game online, you should be thanking M$ for their contribution. They pushed it and people took to it. SONY entered this gen with no clue that online gaming would actually become the norm. Want proof? PSN is still gimped.

I play a new 10 hour long singleplayer game every month or so. A little longer for the occasional RPG. The other 90% of my gaming each month is online...so...thanks M$!

Competition forces others to be better. I'm now waiting to see what M$ comes up with next gen to combat PS+. In both scenarios gamers win.
admiralvic  +   380d ago
"Xbox Live made online gaming happen on consoles. If you game online, you should be thanking M$ for their contribution. They pushed it and people took to it. SONY entered this gen with no clue that online gaming would actually become the norm. Want proof? PSN is still gimped. "

You can call PSN "gimped" (Though I don't have a clue what aspect of it is so awful that it's gimped next to XBL. If this was Nintendo we were talking about, then I would fully agree. They still don't even have a real sense of "account" yet.) all you want, but the PS3 launched with wifi (contrary to 360 lacking it at the time), which I think proves otherwise.
coolbeans  +   380d ago
I don't see how built-in wifi would disprove the "gimped" portion of Never's statement. That's more of a testament to the features included with each PS3 (the hardware side), not the online infrastructure.
admiralvic  +   380d ago
@ Coolbeans

My remark was in reference to "online gaming would actually become the norm", which is why I brought up wifi. If Sony didn't think online would actually become the norm, why would they make it more accessible than the aforementioned Xbox 360 at the time? I only mentioned the gimped aspect (which I even mentioned I have no clue what that even means, so I fail to understand how you thought I could debate a point I admittedly don't grasp / believe in) because it's irrelevant next to Sony making online more accessible to people.
#2.1.2 (Edited 380d ago ) | Agree(1) | Disagree(1) | Report
coolbeans  +   380d ago
-Okay, that would make more sense as a response, but I'm not sure how anyone else could read that from the first reply (sorry to get pedantic about this).

If you remove all parenthetical statements, this is what is shown: "You can call PSN 'gimped' all you want, but the PS3 launched with wifi, which I think proves otherwise."

-"(which I even mentioned I have no clue what that even means, so I fail to understand how you thought I could debate a point I admittedly don't grasp / believe in)"

I never mean to bring up unnecessary counterpoints that stifle the debate, but you did lead me on into thinking you were aware of what the term 'gimped' means:

"Though I don't have a clue what aspect of it is so awful that it's gimped next to XBL"
admiralvic  +   380d ago
If you REALLY want to play this game, NeverEnding's reply uses the PSN being gimped as proof of Sony having "no clue that online gaming would actually become the norm." My reply starts off by dismissing the gimped claim and purports that including wifi suggests that Sony saw this coming and that's why they included it.

"-"(which I even mentioned I have no clue what that even means, so I fail to understand how you thought I could debate a point I admittedly don't grasp / believe in)"

I never mean to bring up unnecessary counterpoints that stifle the debate, but you did lead me on into thinking you were aware of what the term 'gimped' means:

"Though I don't have a clue what aspect of it is so awful that it's gimped next to XBL""

If you weren't a moderator I would assume you were a troll for a comment like that. Just saying... Anyway, I know what gimped literally means, but I don't know what aspect of the PSN is gimped as I think it's fine with the exception of the crappy store (can't say M$ has a better one of those though...). In either case, if I don't know what aspect they're saying is gimped and I don't think it's gimped, then ultimately I have no clue what I would be debating.
Septic  +   380d ago
@admiral

"If you weren't a moderator I would assume you were a troll for a comment like that."

What?! How on earth can what he said, remotely be considered as trolling? The chap actually was remarkably humble and composed when he made that point. I wouldn't have been so nice lol.

He said:

"I never mean to bring up unnecessary counterpoints that stifle the debate, but you did lead me on into thinking you were aware of what the term 'gimped' means: "

And then he pointed out your quote, which made me think the same thing.

"Though I don't have a clue what aspect of it is so awful that it's gimped next to XBL"

I don't get it. Please explain how that could possibly be interpreted as a troll comment? Maybe you're misinterpreting the 'tone' of this post?

Anyway, PSN was, and still is gimped. It is MS that forced Sony's hand in this area and I actually believe that PSN Plus is a result of that. You see, Sony can't match the capabilities of the 360 in respect of cross-game chat and voice messages etc, features that have been much requested for a while and so PSN Plus is a way to somehow mitigate those shortcomings by adding more 'value' to the service itself.

Competition is great because now you have Trophies, better social functionality as can be seen with the VITA and PS4, and more accessibly, immediate gameplay (no mandatory installs etc), a bundled headset etc.
#2.1.5 (Edited 380d ago ) | Agree(2) | Disagree(2) | Report
admiralvic  +   380d ago
I mentioned the trolling bit because I don't mention I don't know what the term means, just that I don't know what aspect is gimped. The first time I say I have no clue what aspect is gimped and the second time I reaffirm that I don't know what aspect is gimped and therefor can't debate it. I understand that SOME ASPECT of the PSN is apparently inferior to XBL, but without them clarifying what they mean, I am merely going off what I believe it means and I personally see them as fairly even (hence the "admittedly don't grasp / believe in" remark).

"What?! How on earth can what he said, remotely be considered as trolling? The chap actually was remarkably humble and composed when he made that point. I wouldn't have been so nice lol. "

While we can agree to disagree, trolling is the simple act of trying to get a rise out of someone. Since I am not trying to contest that the PSN is gimped, what difference does it make if I literally know what it means? It makes no difference, as it was never my point or something I debated about. I even stated in one of my previous posts that I was merely dismissing it. Since I don't see why it matters and I can tell you that I am not really jazzed about reiterating my comments a bunch of times. Perhaps if he wanted to avoid my "misuse" of the term, perhaps he could have been so kind to define it. And since it's take things to an overly literal degree day, I am saying define this statement exactly " Want proof? PSN is still gimped. "

'Anyway, PSN was, and still is gimped. It is MS that forced Sony's hand in this area and I actually believe that PSN Plus is a result of that. You see, Sony can't match the capabilities of the 360 in respect of cross-game chat and voice messages etc, features that have been much requested for a while and so PSN Plus is a way to somehow mitigate those shortcomings by adding more 'value' to the service itself. "

If this is your crazy gimped nonsense, then I don't see how it's the PSN's fault in ANY WAY. According to Eurogamer ( http://www.eurogamer.net/ar... ) the PS3 can't do it because of RAM. This has absolutely nothing to do with the PSN, especially because the PlayStation Vita is perfectly capable of accomplishing cross game chat via the same "gimped" PSN. You can blame Sony for a lot of things, but you can't blame the PSN that is both capable of doing it on the Vita and incapable of doing it on the PS3 as a PSN fault. Build, OS, something of this nature? Sure, but it's not a PSN problem.

Anywho, I wouldn't say missing features like voice messages makes the PSN gimped, just like I wouldn't say the inability to gameshare makes the Xbox gimped. They're just different features that the other supports. Being gimped would be thinks like the horribly dated friend code system, not the inability to voice chat a message.
#2.1.6 (Edited 380d ago ) | Agree(0) | Disagree(1) | Report
Septic  +   380d ago
"the PS3 can't do it because of RAM. This has absolutely nothing to do with the PSN, especially because the PlayStation Vita is perfectly capable of accomplishing cross game chat via the same "gimped" PSN. "

You are misunderstanding my point. The RAM limitations are EXACTLY what I'm talking about. Its because of Sony's shortsightedness in respect of this design that PSN PLUS was born. That is what I was arguing.

MS put the pressure on Sony in this regard and that's why we see VITA benefit from this. The 360's abilities no doubt put pressure on Sony; x-game chat has been a much requested feature ever since the 360 had it.

"Anywho, I wouldn't say missing features like voice messages makes the PSN gimped,"

Yeah well I would. Its actually quite ridiculous that the PS3 can't do that when the old Xbox could. Frankly, its exclusion is shocking and Sony actually dodged this point for a number of years, leaving fans to speculate that the feature would be introduced in the console later on.

For primarily online gamers, like me, I can't stand the draconian nature of PSN. It is just unbearable.
TheHybrid  +   380d ago
::slow clap::
Software_Lover  +   380d ago
You really just blabbed a bunch of stuff and never brought anything home. You should make 3 points, give clarity on those points basically provide proof and specifics, then bring it home with a conclusion. This stuff, basically, could have been written in anyone of the news topics......... and it has.

You're not gonna win any of those gift cards with this man.
#3 (Edited 380d ago ) | Agree(12) | Disagree(2) | Report | Reply
TheRealHeisenberg  +   380d ago
I wish I had read your comment before reading that drivel called a blog.
s45gr32  +   380d ago
true is disappointing because in a lot of ways Microsoft has hurt the gaming industry. Sadly the blogger didn't mention anything in regards to how Microsoft prevented game developers from releasing free dlc, charged say developers for updating and patching their own creations, the ability to run their own networks/servers, hell they were even charged for using more than two DVD 9 discs. DVD 9 format prevented game developers from truly giving us next generation games.
zerocrossing  +   380d ago
Very good blog. Now don't get me wrong here, I'm not a MS hater in fact I really liked the OG Xbox and the 360 but as far as competition for competitions sake goes, evidently it's not a healthy thing at all, MS have been responsible for some of the most backwards and damaging policies to come about last gen, and going by their previous but now thankfully debunked DRM policies for the Xbox One, it's obvious that given the chance they would have continued to try and dictate to us what they say is good for the industry, instead of giving gamers what it is we actually want.
admiralvic  +   380d ago
First things first, never start an article telling people that you're bias. The second people see you're bias, then your "poorly worded" statements instantly become bias nonsense that no one cares about.

With that being said, no one counts Nintendo in the race because they're pretty much doing their own thing. To this day the Wii U's online system is not up to par with what we had on the original Xbox in the early days of Xbox Live and a lot of multiplatform titles don't release on Nintendo platforms. It's almost to the point where buying a Nintendo system hinges on how much you enjoy Zelda, Mario, Mario Kart, Super Smash Bros, not how good the system may or may not be. Due to this most people ignore it as you pretty much need a Wii U and a PS4 / XB1 to play most of the games, as a good percent are just not releasing on the Wii U. Now if this changes the mentality will change, but that's another topic for another day.

As far as a lot of your M$ hate goes, yes they do bad things, but nothing is intrinsically evil either. Since I don't want to get into a debate about this, I will ignore talking about most of it and move onto your FPS remark. While you attribute the oversaturation of the FPS (I am going to talk about all shooters though, since a lot of people lump TPS games into this FPS hate, since there are a lot of shooters in general) genre on M$, did you ever stop to think how many shooters Sony publishes? Killzone (2 on the PS3, 1 upcoming on the Vita), Resistance (3 on the PS3, 1 on the Vita), Uncharted (3 on the PS3, 1 on the Vita) and these alone match Halo / Gears Xbox side.

Finally, M$ implementing DRM is just another push towards less freedom. Sony adopted the online pass system, though no one cared. M$ simply took it one more step and now they know better than to try it. With this being said, M$ now has to win people back, so we will probably see some nice promotions on their end, which might result in a better PSN or I suppose a less dated Nintendo Network.

Anyway, absolutes are never right, but that doesn't mean even the bad is really bad. For as much hate as you give M$, don't forget they brought in the wildly successful achievement system and really pushed Sony to offer a more complete online system (PSN), which may or may not have happened otherwise (look at the Nintendo Network...).
iamnsuperman  +   380d ago
"Nintendo in the race because they're pretty much doing their own thing"

Thats true because Nintendo created a system last generation that was really cheap. It became a second system to a lot of people essentially wiping out the need for them to be competitive. People bought a 360 or a PS3 and they bought a Wii as well (because it was cheap).

Now the Wii U is in competition with the PS4 and The One because of its price. But the problem is no third party wants to. This leaves Nintendo in an unstable position. Nintendo need to lower the price so it becomes the second system (like the Wii did) or get some third party

Side note. I wouldn't count Uncharted as an FPS style game. It is a bit more than that.
#5.1 (Edited 380d ago ) | Agree(0) | Disagree(0) | Report | Reply
kenmid  +   380d ago
"I'm no fanboy, but I'm a huge fan of PlayStation and Nintendo. There is a bit of a bias (everyone has one) but I'm not letting that bias blind me."

So basically your saying your a fanboy.
xrap  +   380d ago
i don't know why ps4 fans it's alway talking about DRM?
hh i think playstation+playstation fans = pirate station!
xrap  +   380d ago
everybody must know microsoft who push video game technology as far as possible something like xbox live+hdd+dashboard+game achievement+gamerscore and xbox live arcade games.
IcicleTrepan  +   380d ago
competition is never bad in any industry. If you disagree it's because you don't understand how markets work. If a product exists that you don't like, you don't buy it. If tons of people don't buy it, it fails. Obviously people must think the One has redeeming qualities or else they wouldn't buy it. Unlike what people seem to think on here, the consumer is not as stupid as you would believe. Early adopters may get screwed but over the long run you will see. If Xbox doesn't compete well with PS4, Xbox will be gone simple as that. So instead of telling people what they should or shouldn't like why don't you just sit back and watch what happens.
kewlkat007  +   380d ago
This guy admits he is a fanboy..why am I here..

You are one of those dudes that thinks having one competitor in the market benefits him because it is his favorite brand...Hahahahahahahaha

Definition: A monopoly is when a business, usually a large corporation, is the only provider of a good or service. Monopolies are usually bad for an economy because they restrict free trade, preventing the market itself to set prices.

Why Are Monopolies Bad?

Since monopolies are the only provider, they can set pretty much any price they choose. This is known as price-fixing. They can pretty much do this, regardless of demand, because they know the consumer has no choice.

-end
#10 (Edited 380d ago ) | Agree(4) | Disagree(4) | Report | Reply
Godmars290  +   380d ago
"This guy admits he is a fanboy..why am I here.."

Because you either can't or refuse to see that with the orignal plans MS had with the XB1 that they presented the best example of a monopoly.

At their worst when Sony believed themselves to be the only game in town after two very successful consoles they made the mistake of trying to manipulate developers. Very likely might have directly expressed that arrogance on consumers after the PS3, but have now learned from that mistake.
kewlkat007  +   379d ago
I've seen you post sensible material...and this response is not one of them..

what a company present, thinks or perceive themselves as, has nothing to do with dominating a market with present day healthy competition. Assumptions can always be made.

Hey with MS's Original XboxOne policies consumers still would of had a choice to chose what console they wanted. It's not like they cornered the market all the sudden, with that now, fail strategy.

The essence of good competition does just that. Company still tries to appease the consumer and differentiate themselves from the competition through different strategies like price, policies...etc.
Godmars290  +   379d ago
The problem with what MS originally intended when it was only rumor was fairly obvious. As it stood it would have actively excluded a third of the 360's current user base from buying the new system, and directly coerced the remainder towards XBL Gold accounts.

None of that has to do anything with giving consumers choices. Instead it was poised to punish the uninformed. It still is if what's true about Forza 5 "needing" online verification in the form of "free mandatory" DLC.

What MS did in essence was act as if they no competition and its still going to wind up hurting them whether you and others realize it or not.
kewlkat007  +   379d ago
We can all make assumptions on where MS's old policies would of led us but yet, we still would of had a choice to choose out of 3 consoles regardless how unpopular these policies would of been, though some didn't have a big problem with it. Has not to do with MS cornering the Hardware market.

Wishing Nintendo was dead and Microsoft not entering the gaming market would of sucked for most of us with one console to game on.
Godmars290  +   379d ago
No. That MS's DRM policies are still going to wind up inconveniencing some is a certainty.

I will also assert that as they once had things planned out with the focus on TV and cable, they likely would have moved a lot of hardware, but now because much of those plans have been revealed and reversed because of backlash, that they seem to be somehow unaware of how badly their narrow focus had hurt them, that that's going to be a mess as well.

Yes there are and will be other choices when the XB1 comes out, but for some if not many its going to become an obviously bad one. Possibly one so bad the brand could end up lame if not dead by the end of the console generation. Become the very sign that MS never should have gotten into consoles in the first place.

And yes - I know you don't want to hear that.
kewlkat007  +   379d ago
I disagree with your assumptions on Ms and why they are in the gaming business.

I doubt MS is going anywhere and I'm quite glad they entered the foray of gaming. I know you and others, don't want to hear that as well, going by this article.

At the end of the day, the other 2 consoles have yet to released and I'm sure both will sell just fine even with the assumed DOA claims for Microsoft. Competition will be better because of.
#10.3.1 (Edited 379d ago ) | Agree(0) | Disagree(0) | Report
BillytheBarbarian  +   380d ago
I will disagree unless madden actually starts over with an entirely new engine with player models that don't look like long armed monkeys. Madden 05 is hailed by many as the best one ever. NFL 2k5 is hailed as one of the best football games in history. Competition pushed devs. Now EA could care less because it's the only NFL game you can get.

Same would happen with consoles.
glenn1979  +   380d ago
im a huge xbox fan but im no fanboy, enough said competition is good for the industry
CaptainHawk   380d ago | Spam
MichaelLito79  +   380d ago
This blog reeks of fanboyism and bad journalism. There is nothing wrong with loving your system of choice but making claims that are false are what can hurt the gaming industry not competition.
#14 (Edited 380d ago ) | Agree(5) | Disagree(5) | Report | Reply
s45gr32  +   380d ago
I don't agree because Microsoft has ruined gaming here is a blog that proves it:

http://0verhyped.com/2012/0...

I mean let's face it everyone just got duped by xbox live gold which blinded people from its hardware issues : RROD, disc read errors, disc tray jamming, disc scratching. It's software issues like preventing game developers from releasing free dlc, charging game developers for patching/updating their creations, mistreating and heavily restricting indie game developers, pay to play online, pay for avatars, pay for peer to peer servers, pay and pay. Unfortunately, Sony decided to copy Microsoft aaarrrgghh I mean what's better free unlockables or achievements? ..........
#14.1 (Edited 380d ago ) | Agree(0) | Disagree(7) | Report | Reply
s45gr32  +   380d ago
If Sony would of copied Steam as opposed to xbox live console gaming would of being better. Like we would of had deals and steals without a subscription fee, dedicated servers, and third party communication services support like Skype or Mumbo. It would of force Microsoft to drop the xbox live gold subscription. All Microsoft was to bring a few features from PC and put them behind a pay wall. Not only that Microsoft prevented game developers from releasing free dlc, charged them for updates /patches, along for using the third DVD disk. It was DVD 9 format that forced game developers to simplify gaming..............

All in all I agree with this blog, it almost nailed it.

http://m.alibaba.com/produc...
Geezus  +   380d ago
you would also have drm which by the reaction of the gaming community when the xbox one originally was announced its a really bad bad thing
s45gr32  +   380d ago
Forget my previous comment I messed up badly. So bad I put a link for buying flash drives in bulk. Damn it, my cell phone betrayed me lol.

Okay personally I applaud the blogger for trying to write in regards to exposing Microsoft for all it's wrong doings in the gaming industry.

Now I am glad that gamers put their foot down in regards to xbox one DRM policies. I applaud gamers for waking up and standing up to Microsoft yay!!!

Okay back to topic, Microsoft did ruined the gaming industry here is a blog that proves it

http://0verhyped.com/2012/0...

Again forget my previous comment is terrible end of story.
DEATHxTHExKIDx  +   380d ago
Microsoft is here to stay.
Geezus  +   380d ago
me thinks you don't understand how business works if Sony and Nintendo were the only ones nowadays sony would monopolize the market and you would get the sony of 2006 the sony that was cocky and sucked. Competition drives innovation and like others have mentioned thank Ms for introducing xbox live and forcing sony's hand in the online department if not you would still be stuck in the dark days of online gaming think early ps3 and current nintendo...yikes!
#17 (Edited 380d ago ) | Agree(1) | Disagree(1) | Report | Reply
No_Limit  +   380d ago
What a lame and bias blog.

The blogger is the same person that said this in one of his post: "I'm already loving FF15 and KH3, but I'm just annoyed their on the Xbone." and "This blog is right. Xboners are the most retarded fanboys out there. "
Sound like a fanboy to me.
#18 (Edited 380d ago ) | Agree(7) | Disagree(2) | Report | Reply
Theo1130  +   380d ago
I can destroy your whole argument in a couple of sentences.

The reason the PS4 is looking better in comparison to the Xbox one is that the Xbox 360 took a lot of market share from Sony, now they were forced to up their game to match and surpass Microsoft and the Xbox 360.

Competition is good for the industry

Even in the PC space with Greenmangaming and Steam, great prices on gmg encourage Steam to include better stuff to keep people from going to GMG
Steak_Monster  +   380d ago
Hey I love my playstation as much as the next man, but let us not forget all of the lies and shady money making schemes of their past.

-All first party PS3 titles had Online pass DRM
-Failed promise of PS3 to PSP remote play.
-Failed promise of PS3 to Vita remote play.
-Still missing the promised digital PSP games on Vita store.
-Still missing the promised PS1 games on Vita store.
-Released an expensive all digital game machine (the PSP Go) and proceed to have large swaths of the games not released digitally.
-Overpriced digital games that are years old that never see price reductions even when their retail counterparts do.
-PSN & Sony has had several serious security leaks, the biggest of which occurred between 17/04/11-19/04-11. Sony shut down PSN on 20/04/11 under the guise of ‘Maintenance’ however it wasn't until 04/05/11(Over a week after the attack) that they released that 77 million registered PlayStation Network accounts, incl credit cards, passwords and other “identifiable personal information” had been compromised.
-For the above mentioned attack, Sony waited two days before even letting the FBI know that PSN Members data was stolen.
-The service outage caused by this attack totaled 24 days, they originally announced service would be restored “within a week”.
-This attack is considered one of the largest security breaches ever, surpassing their previous 2007 PSN leak, which affected 45 million customers. There had and has been further attacks to Sony’s product websites which have affected all registered sony users and customers, incl PSN members.
-Forcefully removed Linux support from PS3, a feature announced before launch sell/promote the original console.
-Consistently implied that they were adding cross game chat to the PS3 even though they knew the hardware was incapable.
-Leaving it to the very last minute to announce that the PSP Vita would require (extremely expensive) proprietary memory cards

Sony are no angels and are only taking advantage of the backlash that has risen in response to Microsoft's DRM policy. If Sony thought for one second that they could make more money with the same DRM as the Xbox, they would.
All Sony is doing is placating us gamers, and we are just eating it up.

Just as a disclaimer, I'm not suggesting that MS or Nintendo haven't been guilty of some of these points, but don't hold out Sony as some beacon of perfection.

It's their PR teams that deserve most of the praise.
#20 (Edited 380d ago ) | Agree(4) | Disagree(0) | Report | Reply
BIGBOSS08  +   380d ago
microsoft should sell their consoles only in US. nobody else cares. dont bother releasing halo anywhere else either. actually isnt that the only thing microsoft actually have going for them? just halo. 10+ years and thats all they bought to the industry.
kryteris  +   379d ago
competition is good, it is better for open systems. If MS were to open each game to the PC and Xbone, then that would be great.

Competition w/ closed systems not as good. But they "can" offer exclusives, unfortunately they dont always offer any competitive discounts.
givemeshelter  +   379d ago
Sorry...Have to 100% disagree with this BLOG. Simple economics folks. Competition drives the marketplace. Pure business 101...
Regardless if you despise Microsoft or love them, they did bring competition to the console arena.
Online console gaming was pushed by them. They gave Sony competition when they became arrogant. See how that works?
Sony gave Nintendo competition when Nintendo was arrogant. See how that worked?
Imagine gaming without the Xbox and just Sony because lets face it. Nintendo is not exactly cutting it these days unless it's handheld gaming.
If you work in the marketplace... Hold a business degree... Run a business... Play the markets... Follow economics... Research...

http://www.politonomist.com...

http://www.investopedia.com...

http://businessgross.com/20...

You obviosuly have no concept on how the business world or markets work. Nintendo... Microsoft and Sony are corporations and as such are a business to make a profit and to reward their shareholders. Anyone stating competition is not viable or good has no understanding of the process... Or just loves the company of their selected choice (And that's what I am getting with you with this BLOG)

Btw. Your BLOG really ended and hit the skids as soon as you said this:

"I'm no fanboy, but I'm a huge fan of PlayStation and Nintendo. There is a bit of a bias (everyone has one) but I'm not letting that bias blind me."

Right there you lost ALL credibility...
Oh...and I took the time to pull up your posting history...
Good grief man.. You constantly hate on MS with a desire and passion that rivals many. You are fully biased in your hate of Microsoft and hence should not even pen this BLOG.
#23 (Edited 379d ago ) | Agree(1) | Disagree(1) | Report | Reply
EXVirtual  +   379d ago
http://n4g.com/user/blogpos...
You'll find out by reading this. And didn't I say the original Xbox and 360 helped where Sony and Nintendo are today? One other thing, yes they pushed online gaming, but they pushed it too much. It's because of things like too much online gaming that's pulling back innovation. Every game now seems to have online multiplayer. Even FFXV and KH3 might. That's a huge problem for people like me, because the story and gameplay are the main things I'm playing a JRPG for and adding in online multiplayer is pulling the effort put into the story back. And about MS' shareholders and investors, I hope you realize that they want MS out of the whole gaming thing. @maniacmayhem, were you not reading it properly.
#23.1 (Edited 379d ago ) | Agree(0) | Disagree(2) | Report | Reply
kewlkat007  +   379d ago
" One other thing, yes they pushed online gaming, but they pushed it too much. It's because of things like too much online gaming that's pulling back innovation."

I just don't get you Sony hardcores..
thebudgetgamer  +   379d ago
This blog is a bit harsh on Microsoft, I do believe too much compettition might be bad. Like we found out in the eighties.
maniacmayhem  +   379d ago
This blog just stinks of fanboy rage.

Imagine if 360 wasn't around. Imagine the PS3 being at what, 600 to 700 bux first launch, and it being the only HD system on the market. You think they would have dropped the price if their only competitor was the Wii? You think they would have added achievements, made competitive changes to their online infrastructure or offered free games to try and lure people over to PS+?

You are fooling yourself thinking that MS/360 isn't needed. And all these supposed practices is what each company has done before.

"Moneyhats, gimped multiplats, making too many games multiplats, encouraging the over saturation of FPS'."

Absolutely false. It is so hilarious to peak inside the mind of a loyalist. But I just have one question out of this statement:

How exactly did MS encourage the over saturation of FPS's?

This is something I have to know.
EXVirtual  +   379d ago
Didn't you read the end of the post?
'I guess with the original Xbox and in some cases the 360 have put Sony and Nintendo where they are today'.
As for the moneyhats, explain Tales of Vesperia. As for the gimped multiplats, explain every multiplatform game between the PS3 and 360. Sony screwed up big time with the CELL processor, but the PS3 was more powerful than the 360. So yes, gimped multiplats.
To address the FPS thing and everything else you said, you need to look at this:
http://n4g.com/user/blogpos...
maniacmayhem  +   379d ago
Tales of Vesperia was Namco's decision to publish it for the West. And how is this a bad thing? MS provided a FANTASTIC RPG which would have otherwise never have been released outside of Japan. How is that bad for the industry, and how is that bad for a 360 user?

The PS3 was more powerful but what does that have to do with gimped multiplats? Because was one shadow is darker for one game than the other. Every multiplat played the same and the graphical difference was miniscule to the point that the graphic comparison articles that used to be abundant on this site just stopped.

So what game was gimped?

As for you FPS argument your blog doesn't answer my question...

How exactly did MS encourage the over saturation of FPS's?

You bring up other games that sony has that are not FPS, but MS has them too...

Crackdown
Alan Wake
Fable
Lost Odyssey
Blue Dragon
Forza
Banjo Nuts and Bolts

You now have another article that is just as bias and non informative as this one. Not to mention all those supposed "MS is bad" links don't work.

And if your end of statement in your blog is what you truly think and feel then MS is needed which makes both of your blogs absolutely pointless.
#25.1.1 (Edited 379d ago ) | Agree(5) | Disagree(0) | Report
givemeshelter  +   379d ago
Your other blog is the same as this. Your rant on hate of Microsoft and love affair with Sony. You want Microsoft out of the console business so Sony can be the only HD core console gaming system... Thank GOD sane people would disagree with you.
Only die hard fanboys want less competition in the marketplace... Or someone who works for the company they want to see control a monopoly... Which one are you because both blogs reek of this?
givemeshelter  +   379d ago
Btw. You might want to stop while you're not ahead... Notice how everyone disagrees with both of your blogs? Take a guess and gander as to why... This blog would better be suited for a PlayStation or Nintendo forum site...
#28 (Edited 379d ago ) | Agree(2) | Disagree(0) | Report | Reply

Add comment

You need to be registered to add comments. Register here or login
Remember