CRank: 5Score: 1330

Do people really enjoy restricting their enjoyment?

We read it all the time, I think system A is better than system B because... Or why would you want that system? Some reasons are rational, others not so much. But who exactly are they trying to convince, themselves that they made the right choice? Or better yet, do we have to make a choice? For some yes we do. Financially not everyone can buy all the systems. Or some simply do not have the time to play everything on every platform. Perfectly acceptable reasons to limit your enjoyment. But what about those that go beyond that? Those that need to defend their decisions or worse yet attack the other platforms? What does that say about these individuals?

To sidetrack a bit and maybe did deeper into this way of thinking it reminds me of how people will change their buying habits based on some moral ground. Remember when Mel Gibson made those anti-semitic remarks? How many stopped watching his movies because of it? Call me shallow but I don't care what he said. I think he is a fine actor. Get the Gringo was a great movie. Why would I deprive myself from enjoying that movie because he made some stupid comments?

This takes me to video games. Why do some people act like they can't enjoy games like Gran Turismo And Forza? Why can't we like both? Is it because we deprived ourselves from owning both systems so we made a choice and now we have to fight to make sure we made the right one? Or are these arguments based on some moral ground? That these companies or game developers said or did something so now we refuse ourselves from enjoying those games?

Has gaming turned that personal where we read way too much and get too involved with what goes on behind the scenes, that we have lost focus? Where we can no longer just escape and have fun and share our hobby? Where it's better to argue and attack others for not making the same buying decisions?

Let me ask again, are some of us really enjoying limiting our enjoyment?

The story is too old to be commented.
Lukejrl2835d ago

I see the problem as supporting a company that uses underhanded tactics to trying to siphon money off us. By implementing, or trying to, policies without a clear advantage for consumers but plenty for the greedy companies, Microsoft has shown its colors.

While all companies want to make money, Microsoft withholds things from you if you don't pay for XboX Live. Sony gives you so so so much, and just now has asked for psplus to play online, to improve the network. I say "asked" because everything else is still available, including Free to Play games, just notonline multiplayer. Xbox? you can't even watch netflix without paying for gold.

Not to mention they offer nothing to actually utilize Kinect in a meaningful complex game. Yet force it down our throats.

And for the record I have a PS3,and bought 2 xboxes the second being just to upgrade to elite 250gb. i also own a wii, wiiu, vita, and nds. so no i do not limit my enjoyment. but i will look down on someone who does not look at a pattern set by an individual or company that uses such tactics and says why would support them.

Noobz12831d ago (Edited 2831d ago )

Sorry for the late reply as I didn't even know my blog was up.

LIVE used to be able to get away with a surcharge early on because they brought online gaming to the mainstream in an easy to use way and making sure everyone had the same experience while offering a system voice chat that worked seamlessly across all games. Valve then came out with Steam and Sony got serious about online gaming after as well. So what happened is they are able to compete later on while remaining free. Steam is the only one left that offers a competitive service for free. The PS3 and Nintendo also still provide options. The plus service has pushed Microsoft into offering free games as well but I agree plus offers greater value.

The thing is does the fee inhibit people from buying the product? I also don't see Kinect being forced down my throat anymore than the Wii U controller. It's a feature they believe in and again it is more about cost as it does add to the overall expense of buying that hardware. Just like Blu-ray did on the PS3 and the Wii U controller. So if it is cost that's the issue then yes I can understand.

DRAGON below,

I have been buying systems for many years. Sports is usually supported by being the home team. None of the systems really do that to you do they? Maybe Japan might have issue with the xbox but I don't know how much of an impact home brand has anywhere else. Cars? People love the looks and the customization and the rarity of them to be collectors. Game systems? Sure you have loyal customers who buy certain brands due to reliability and it's Nintendo who had the best track record for that. Certain franchises can only be bought on those systems as well which is why many but multiple systems. But this predates what I've been saying are we enjoying limiting our enjoyment?

There is also a major difference between griping for actually wanting that product to be better so that one day we want it, as opposed to simply
griping on a daily basis just because we can. Which seems quite common here and I don't know why.


I think you touched on some of the issues and that is immaturity. Why would I want Ford to not do well just because I like Chevrolet? Do I hate on Gran Turismo more because Iike Forza better or like GT because it's part of Sony? Sounds asinine to me. It's about having fun enjoying the games. Some people just want to complicate matters by arguing over everything.


You are repeating part of what I already said. Time and money are key issues. Still doesn't explain why they need to do negative campaigning against the other products because of it. It's also perfectly normal to not enjoy games in a series like Fable. Once a game is relesed it makes it hard to make it better. That's what we should be striving for, constructive criticism. Not just endlessly bashing things we don't have any intentions of supporting the game just because of the people who make the game or the company behind it.

Lukejrl2831d ago

You retort to my kinect point was well put. While similar in that kinect and the gamepad set each of their systems apart, they are too different in what they offer for gameplay.

The kinect's motion controls do not add to a game. The game needs to be either built around the motion controls, or not in them at all.That is the ultimatum because we have seen what tacking on motion controls to a game from all three systems and it simply doesn't work. Kinect is still not accurate enough to emulate a game like skyward sword. Voice control can be effective, but still not there for everyone especially other countries or accents.
The gamepad, offers a second screen for information, voice controls. Imagine a Metal Gear Solid codec convos taking place on the gamepad, while you still play. ZombiU used it awesomely, and if you didn't like it you could turn it off. Any awkwardness went away as you get used to it. It also gives you off tv play. I play some games in bed while my wife watches the bachelor.

Kinect is a cool feature, but doesn't offer any genuinely great reasons to use it. While the Gamepad still needs to be fully utilized it has far more potential and features that already can be used for gaming properly.

Your other points of the evolution of online play are spot on, but it doesn't take away the fact that Microsoft has put everything behind a paywall. Netflix, hulu, and internet browsing has no reason to need 2 subsciptions to use. I think it is because Xbox needs you to sign in to xbox live in order to track your movements and sell them to advertisers. With the psn, I do not even need to sign in, it asks me to but if I decline netflix still loads.

DragonKnight2833d ago

How long have you been gaming? Serious question. If you've been gaming longer than, say, the PS2 era then every question you've asked in your blog wouldn't even need to be asked.

This isn't anything new you know. It's not limited to consoles either. You ever seen sporting events? Ever been to car enthusiast forums?

It isn't about limiting enjoyment. People have a tendency to place much of themselves in the things they enjoy. They tend to not comprehend that others may enjoy something that they think is terrible. This is something that has gone on for all of human existence.

But it's their right to feel that way as much as it is another's right to enjoy what they want. No one has the right to tell people what feelings to express in that regard.

It's the same thing when people discuss controversial games like DmC or the FFXIII trilogy. Enough people will demand that those who don't like the game not talk about it, but they have the right to talk about it anywhere, and any time they want. As much of a right to do that as you would have to talk about how much you like it or are hyped for it.

So I think the better question is this. Is it better to constantly gripe on people for how and what they express, or would it be better to just accept that people will be how they are and that you have the right to be how you are too?

PS3Freak2832d ago

I agree with a lot of what you said here.

I used to be a huge fanboy when I first joined this site. I was only 17 at the time. I bought a 360 2.5 years ago and have really enjoyed it. It's stupid to be so childish that it leads to irrational hatred of the "other guy".

I also agree with what you said about Mel Gibson. A lot of people stopped watching Two and a Half Men because of the breakdown Charlie Sheen had. Who cares if he's a drug addict, the show is hilarious and that's all that matters.

As for Gran Turismo and Forza; I've been playing GT since 1999 and absolutely love the series. When I got my Xbox I picked up Forza 3 but just couldn't get into it. I didn't like the structure, the tuning, the preset aids that were way over the top. Part of that could have been bias towards GT but most of it was personal preference.

Point is don't hate on something until you try it.

dedicatedtogamers2832d ago

Due to the financial pinch, a lot of people are forced to get only one platform. Naturally, that will make people want their platform to be "the best" because they're going to miss out on what another platform offers. They want the best bang for their buck and if they think they've found it, they'll proudly announce that on the internet.

Additionally, there are a lot of people who are pinched for time. They work long hours. Maybe they have a family and kids, or maybe they have other hobbies, too. The point is that these people want the best bang for their time. Maybe they can afford all the consoles. Maybe not. But maybe they also restrict themselves to one or two platforms because they wouldn't have time to play all the games anyway.

It's perfectly fine to like both. It's also perfectly fine to like one and hate the other. That's called "taste". I love Fable: The Lost Chapters but I absolutely hated Fable 2 and 3. Does that make me a Fable fan or a Fable hater? I dunno. I think we could do with fewer labels in the game industry.

PS3Freak2831d ago

That's all well and good, but 90% of the time the hate is baseless, and irrational.

Lukejrl2831d ago

Yes there is no need to hate, or feel the need to speak up at anytime someone disagrees with you.

The problem is that a lot of people are fools, and they get into arguments, not discussions, with other fools. I think Trolls are usually intelligent people trying to get people to bite and they get their amusement from that. Though intelligent, they are still fools.


Just to clarify fool doesn't just mean stupid.

MidnytRain2830d ago (Edited 2830d ago )

You're on a user-driven website dominated by fanboys who argue about nothing. The atmosphere is very different on other websites. I promise.

Noobz12829d ago

Each day I come here validates what you said. Still, the blogs do interest me in the fact of how people think.

Show all comments (11)