Top

EXVirtual

Contributor
CRank: 5Score: 0

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

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.

The story is too old to be commented.
dedicatedtogamers1168d 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.

PopRocks3591168d ago (Edited 1168d 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.

PopRocks3591168d ago

Four disagrees? Come on guys, at least provide a retort of some kind if you're going to click that disagree button.

HonestDragon1168d 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.

SnakeCQC1167d 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.

r1sh121167d 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.

nosferatuzodd1167d ago (Edited 1167d 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

nosferatuzodd1167d ago (Edited 1167d 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

coolbeans1167d ago (Edited 1167d 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.

+ Show (1) more replyLast reply 1167d ago
NeverEnding19891168d 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.

admiralvic1168d 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.

coolbeans1168d 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.

admiralvic1168d ago (Edited 1168d 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.

coolbeans1168d 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"

admiralvic1168d 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.

Septic1168d ago (Edited 1168d 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.

admiralvic1168d ago (Edited 1168d 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.

Septic1168d 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.

+ Show (4) more repliesLast reply 1168d ago
Software_Lover1168d ago (Edited 1168d 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.

TheRealHeisenberg1168d ago

I wish I had read your comment before reading that drivel called a blog.

s45gr321168d 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.

zerocrossing1168d 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.

admiralvic1168d 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...).

iamnsuperman1168d ago (Edited 1168d 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.

Show all comments (62)
The story is too old to be commented.