Do you want a Sony monopoly on gaming?

  • 150 results
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
Avatar image for deactivated-5d6bb9cb2ee20
deactivated-5d6bb9cb2ee20

82724

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

1

Followers

Reviews: 56

User Lists: 0

Poll Do you want a Sony monopoly on gaming? (137 votes)

Yes 18%
No 82%

I'm just curious: the way Sony fans, more than any other other fan group, talks, it appears as if they actually want a Sony monopoly on video gaming- all forms and facets of video gaming.

Is this right? Do you all actually love Sony so much that you want a monopoly? Sounds to me like you care more about PlayStation than gaming if that is the case.

 • 
Avatar image for cainetao11
cainetao11

38026

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 77

User Lists: 1

#101  Edited By cainetao11
Member since 2006 • 38026 Posts

@AdobeArtist:

Yours and @treedoor posts are spot on. But like some of the lems, cows will concede nothing to their hated "other system". It really is a psychological malady, I believe. To ignore what the history of this industry is showing us, because you love a company. At least in sports its a direct competition of skill. None of the devs are sitting in a room developing exclusives with the opposing devs on the other side at the same time.

Avatar image for cainetao11
cainetao11

38026

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 77

User Lists: 1

#102 cainetao11
Member since 2006 • 38026 Posts

@Coolyfett said:

@Solid_Max13 said:

This seems like trollbait but I'll tell you as a cow no I do not want any monopoly from any company competition is good for all companies and keeps a diversity, you should as the same question to lems

Coolyfett is in somewhat of an agreement with Solid Max. Monopolies are never good, One that is needed is for PlayStation to be the Majority and Nintendo to be the Minority of gaming. Coolyfett loves gaming, but unfortunately due to his career and family doesn't have as much time to play. Sometimes he just doesn't have the energy to pick up a dual shock at all. Coolyfett is also not a fan of collecting video games & collecting consoles. Some gamers are into that, but not Coolyfett. Teasing Nintendo fans is fun for a long list of reasons & seeing Nintendo fans rage out on the internet is the funniest thing and brings joy to Coolyfetts heart. Joy in a mans heart adds years to a mans life. The more Nintendo rage, the more joy for Coolyfett, the longer Coolyfett may live. PlayStation is the best gaming brand, Nintendo is the funniest gaming brand. Everything serves a purpose.

I don't know about anyone else, but @Coolyfett just cracked cainetao11 up. That third person jargon read so funny. I understand about the teasing. Nothing has made me laugh as much as TLOU flopping here, and the butthurt in the titanfall thread, except the petitions by Sony fanboys to prevent games going multiplat. Good times.

Avatar image for Nengo_Flow
Nengo_Flow

10644

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#103 Nengo_Flow
Member since 2011 • 10644 Posts

no, but if there was a company that was going to be the monopoly of gaming, i rather it be SONY.

Avatar image for crashnburn281
CrashNBurn281

1574

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 5

#104 CrashNBurn281
Member since 2014 • 1574 Posts

No. Sony got cocky after the PS2 era and the PS3 was a result.

Monopolies are never a good thing. Competition drives companies to be better.

Avatar image for cainetao11
cainetao11

38026

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 77

User Lists: 1

#105  Edited By cainetao11
Member since 2006 • 38026 Posts

@Nengo_Flow said:

no, but if there was a company that was going to be the monopoly of gaming, i rather it be SONY.

I'd rather it be Valve with Steam, in that dark, fascist world you speak of.

Avatar image for AznbkdX
AznbkdX

4284

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 3

User Lists: 0

#106 AznbkdX
Member since 2012 • 4284 Posts

Hell to the no.

Avatar image for DA1M0Z
DA1M0Z

34

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#107 DA1M0Z
Member since 2010 • 34 Posts

PS1 & PS2 owning marketshare =/= monopoly

Funny many people actually thinks so...

So I guess what MS did with Titanfall = monopoly ??

Avatar image for killatwill15
killatwill15

855

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 5

#108 killatwill15
Member since 2013 • 855 Posts

@WilliamRLBaker said:

@Suppaman100 said:

@charizard1605 said:

@Suppaman100 said:

Would be better than a MS or Nintendo monopoly.

This does not answer my question. Do you want a Sony monopoly?

If we're talking about the old Sony with PS1 and PS2 dominating then yes definitely. They were the best in every aspect.

But too much happened in the mean time and things changed. For example thanks to the bad influence of MS, PS copied the "Xbox live rip-off" crap.

So no.

bububububbububub it was Microsofts fault SOny never ever ever ever ever ever did anything wrong until Microsoft started you know selling games and making money and shit then Sony just had to follow somehow.

Jesus christ Sheen's are horribly stupid.

you are Charlie sheen,

but instead of "winning"

your tag line is "loser"

Avatar image for finalstar2007
finalstar2007

27952

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 9

User Lists: 0

#109 finalstar2007
Member since 2008 • 27952 Posts

Oh **** yea!

#VitaMeansLife

Avatar image for cainetao11
cainetao11

38026

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 77

User Lists: 1

#110 cainetao11
Member since 2006 • 38026 Posts

@finalstar2007 said:

Oh **** yea!

#VitaMeansLife

Its so sad that I believe you mean that.

Avatar image for lamprey263
lamprey263

44503

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 10

User Lists: 0

#111 lamprey263
Member since 2006 • 44503 Posts

I think a monopoly might cause catastrophe to the gaming industry, let me explain.

Back in the days of the PS2 and Xbox I used to be able to walk into any game store and pick up about any game that released that gen, new, stores used to keep robust inventories of everything. Though, since the Xbox 360 and PS3 era used games have skyrocketed and this has probably had an effect on the revenues publishers receive. Stores no longer carried everything, and they'd stop getting new inventory to pimp used. Anyhow, also worth noting that last gen with the push in console power we saw a lot more X360/PS3/PC multiplatform development, which probably helped publishers out quite a bit during the exploding growth of the used game market. However, with a Sony/PC market dominance that could potentially happen this gen, I wonder if that will contract the market greatly where multiplatforms won't yield the sales needed to generate revenues to keep studios open and/or appease game company stockholders.

This all makes me wonder, what effect will this have on the studios that produce things like multiplatform games? Will it effect the quality of games we receive? Will lower revenues from less ports shrink studio sizes? Will we see the studios we've come to love dissolve and their franchises go with them? Or will studios have more resources since they might have less ports to focus work on? Or will Sony develop a a well made digital store that with flexible pricing that keeps gamers buying games long after their released? I think gaming will change this next gen in more ways than we can yet imagine, for better or for worse.

Avatar image for Suppaman100
Suppaman100

5250

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#112 Suppaman100
Member since 2013 • 5250 Posts

@inb4uall said:

@ConanTheStoner said:

@charizard1605 said:

@Suppaman100 said:

@charizard1605 said:

@Telekill said:

I voted yes just to piss you off, but no, there shouldn't be any company that has a monopoly on any industry.

I just don't want Microsoft to succeed anymore. I'm sick of their crap.

I am curious as to why you think so, especially given all of Microsoft's contributions to gaming within the last decade.

Unified online services, achievements, digital distribution, modern development environments for game developers, easy to develop console hardware- these are all positive contributions Microsoft has made to gaming within the last decade.

Might I add that without MS, Playstation brand wouldn't be nearly as great as it is now.

Sorry to butt in but I have an opinion I'd like to share. It's true Microsoft has moved the industry forward. However, they have also introduced several very anti consumer practices. Some of which Sony has adopted.

Nintendo on the other hand has pretty much ignored Microsoft's advancements. they still have crappy online, and saves and games are tied to hardware not accounts. Their system's don't act very well as media hubs like the 360, X1, Ps4 or Ps3, their hardware isn't the most powerful either. But I also like nintendo best out of the three. Because they focus on the things that matter most to me. Fun local multiplayer games. Games that are complete upon release and don't cut stuff out only to be made into DLC later.

If Nintendo and Sony were fighting it out instead of Microsoft and Sony. I think I would like the gaming industry a lot better then where it is now.

Indeed, the industry would be a LOT better if MS never entered the race.

Avatar image for Suppaman100
Suppaman100

5250

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#113 Suppaman100
Member since 2013 • 5250 Posts

@WilliamRLBaker said:

@Suppaman100 said:

@charizard1605 said:

@Suppaman100 said:

Would be better than a MS or Nintendo monopoly.

This does not answer my question. Do you want a Sony monopoly?

If we're talking about the old Sony with PS1 and PS2 dominating then yes definitely. They were the best in every aspect.

But too much happened in the mean time and things changed. For example thanks to the bad influence of MS, PS copied the "Xbox live rip-off" crap.

So no.

bububububbububub it was Microsofts fault SOny never ever ever ever ever ever did anything wrong until Microsoft started you know selling games and making money and shit then Sony just had to follow somehow.

Jesus christ Sheen's are horribly stupid.

Lol keep on denying the fact that MS brought a lot of sh*t to the gaming industry.

And of course Sony did things wrong but in comparison to MS, they're saints.

Now go back to your cave lemming

Avatar image for bulby_g
bulby_g

1861

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#114 bulby_g
Member since 2005 • 1861 Posts

I doubt even Sony want that. Who would they copy!?

Avatar image for delta3074
delta3074

20003

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 2

User Lists: 0

#115  Edited By delta3074
Member since 2007 • 20003 Posts

No company should have a monopoly.

Whoever put 'yes' is an idiot, that is all.

Avatar image for lglz1337
lglz1337

4959

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 5

#116 lglz1337
Member since 2013 • 4959 Posts

yes!

as long as it's not MS monopoly

Avatar image for delta3074
delta3074

20003

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 2

User Lists: 0

#117 delta3074
Member since 2007 • 20003 Posts

@killatwill15 said:

@WilliamRLBaker said:

@Suppaman100 said:

@charizard1605 said:

@Suppaman100 said:

Would be better than a MS or Nintendo monopoly.

This does not answer my question. Do you want a Sony monopoly?

If we're talking about the old Sony with PS1 and PS2 dominating then yes definitely. They were the best in every aspect.

But too much happened in the mean time and things changed. For example thanks to the bad influence of MS, PS copied the "Xbox live rip-off" crap.

So no.

bububububbububub it was Microsofts fault SOny never ever ever ever ever ever did anything wrong until Microsoft started you know selling games and making money and shit then Sony just had to follow somehow.

Jesus christ Sheen's are horribly stupid.

you are Charlie sheen,

but instead of "winning"

your tag line is "loser"

Nah he's right man if SONY does something good it's awesome, if SONY does something bad it 's 'microsofts fault because they did it first'

I'ts pathetic really.

News flash: MS didn't start pay to play online, that would be SEGA with the dreamcast.

Also, Microsoft didn't put rootkits on music CD's first, that would be SONY,lol

Avatar image for delta3074
delta3074

20003

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 2

User Lists: 0

#118 delta3074
Member since 2007 • 20003 Posts
@Suppaman100 said:

Lol keep on denying the fact that MS brought a lot of sh*t to the gaming industry.

And of course Sony did things wrong but in comparison to MS, they're saints.

Now go back to your cave lemming

Pay to play online was SEGA, not microsoft dude.

Avatar image for killatwill15
killatwill15

855

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 5

#119 killatwill15
Member since 2013 • 855 Posts

@delta3074 said:

@killatwill15 said:

@WilliamRLBaker said:

@Suppaman100 said:

@charizard1605 said:

@Suppaman100 said:

Would be better than a MS or Nintendo monopoly.

This does not answer my question. Do you want a Sony monopoly?

If we're talking about the old Sony with PS1 and PS2 dominating then yes definitely. They were the best in every aspect.

But too much happened in the mean time and things changed. For example thanks to the bad influence of MS, PS copied the "Xbox live rip-off" crap.

So no.

bububububbububub it was Microsofts fault SOny never ever ever ever ever ever did anything wrong until Microsoft started you know selling games and making money and shit then Sony just had to follow somehow.

Jesus christ Sheen's are horribly stupid.

you are Charlie sheen,

but instead of "winning"

your tag line is "loser"

Nah he's right man if SONY does something good it's awesome, if SONY does something bad it 's 'microsofts fault because they did it first'

I'ts pathetic really.

News flash: MS didn't start pay to play online, that would be SEGA with the dreamcast.

Also, Microsoft didn't put rootkits on music CD's first, that would be SONY,lol

how is he right?

ps2 out sold xbox og,

and ps3 caught up to 360 despite being a year late,

is about to outsell 360,

and the ps4 out selling the bone.

his concept of "making money and shit" is redundant,

and abiding @WilliamRLBaker will only lead to baldness,

and you and him will be sheens together.

Avatar image for delta3074
delta3074

20003

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 2

User Lists: 0

#120  Edited By delta3074
Member since 2007 • 20003 Posts

@killatwill15 said:

@delta3074 said:

Nah he's right man if SONY does something good it's awesome, if SONY does something bad it 's 'microsofts fault because they did it first'

I'ts pathetic really.

News flash: MS didn't start pay to play online, that would be SEGA with the dreamcast.

Also, Microsoft didn't put rootkits on music CD's first, that would be SONY,lol

how is he right?

ps2 out sold xbox og,

and ps3 caught up to 360 despite being a year late,

is about to outsell 360,

and the ps4 out selling the bone.

his concept of "making money and shit" is redundant,

and abiding @WilliamRLBaker will only lead to baldness,

and you and him will be sheens together.

Hes right because you are blatantly blaming microsoft for SONY adopting a pay to play online strategy

'thanks to the bad influence of MS, PS copied the "Xbox live rip-off" crap.'

Your words

Like i said, it's pathetic, It was SONY's decision to implement pay to play online, had NOTHING to do with MS doing it first. 'Bu-Bu-Bu, microsoft did it first ,they are to blame'

SONY fanboys at there finest 'Bu-Bu'Bu SONY are the saints of gaming'

Saints of gaming my Arse, if anybody deserves that title it would be Nintendo.

As for eh Ps2, NOT the best in every aspect, Gamecube had hands down better exclusives,lol

Avatar image for betamaxx83
betamaxx83

360

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 5

#121 betamaxx83
Member since 2013 • 360 Posts

Lack of competition sucks.

Avatar image for Suppaman100
Suppaman100

5250

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#122 Suppaman100
Member since 2013 • 5250 Posts

@delta3074 said:

@killatwill15 said:

@delta3074 said:

Nah he's right man if SONY does something good it's awesome, if SONY does something bad it 's 'microsofts fault because they did it first'

I'ts pathetic really.

News flash: MS didn't start pay to play online, that would be SEGA with the dreamcast.

Also, Microsoft didn't put rootkits on music CD's first, that would be SONY,lol

how is he right?

ps2 out sold xbox og,

and ps3 caught up to 360 despite being a year late,

is about to outsell 360,

and the ps4 out selling the bone.

his concept of "making money and shit" is redundant,

and abiding @WilliamRLBaker will only lead to baldness,

and you and him will be sheens together.

Hes right because you are blatantly blaming microsoft for SONY adopting a pay to play online strategy

'thanks to the bad influence of MS, PS copied the "Xbox live rip-off" crap.'

Your words

Like i said, it's pathetic, It was SONY's decision to implement pay to play online, had NOTHING to do with MS doing it first. 'Bu-Bu-Bu, microsoft did it first ,they are to blame'

SONY fanboys at there finest 'Bu-Bu'Bu SONY are the saints of gaming'

Saints of gaming my Arse, if anybody deserves that title it would be Nintendo.

As for eh Ps2, NOT the best in every aspect, Gamecube had hands down better exclusives,lol

LOL, so you're denying that MS hasn't influenced Sony at all in adopting the pay to play rip off?

And LOL at the last sentences.

Are you butthurt that gamecube got OWNED on every front by PS2? Lol "better exclusives", pure comedy.

Avatar image for Spartan070
Spartan070

16497

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#123  Edited By Spartan070
Member since 2004 • 16497 Posts

@Suppaman100 said:

Are you butthurt that gamecube got OWNED on every front by PS2? Lol "better exclusives", pure comedy.

RE4 was best on the Gamecube, add in the best 2 games of that gen, Metroid Prime: Echoes and Metroid Prime, and the Gamecube holds its own very well.

Avatar image for killatwill15
killatwill15

855

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 5

#124 killatwill15
Member since 2013 • 855 Posts

@delta3074 said:

@killatwill15 said:

@delta3074 said:

Nah he's right man if SONY does something good it's awesome, if SONY does something bad it 's 'microsofts fault because they did it first'

I'ts pathetic really.

News flash: MS didn't start pay to play online, that would be SEGA with the dreamcast.

Also, Microsoft didn't put rootkits on music CD's first, that would be SONY,lol

how is he right?

ps2 out sold xbox og,

and ps3 caught up to 360 despite being a year late,

is about to outsell 360,

and the ps4 out selling the bone.

his concept of "making money and shit" is redundant,

and abiding @WilliamRLBaker will only lead to baldness,

and you and him will be sheens together.

Hes right because you are blatantly blaming microsoft for SONY adopting a pay to play online strategy

'thanks to the bad influence of MS, PS copied the "Xbox live rip-off" crap.'

Your words

Like i said, it's pathetic, It was SONY's decision to implement pay to play online, had NOTHING to do with MS doing it first. 'Bu-Bu-Bu, microsoft did it first ,they are to blame'

SONY fanboys at there finest 'Bu-Bu'Bu SONY are the saints of gaming'

Saints of gaming my Arse, if anybody deserves that title it would be Nintendo.

As for eh Ps2, NOT the best in every aspect, Gamecube had hands down better exclusives,lol

hey Im not blaming Microsoft for nothing,

I will even give you a chance to quote me on it.

I was only dissing that sheen @WilliamRLBaker,

but like I said, don't abide by @WilliamRLBaker,

otherwise you will rub your head in worry until you are a bald headed sheen.

the fact remains that when he said "bububububbububub it was Microsofts fault SOny never ever ever ever ever ever did anything wrong until Microsoft started you know selling games and making money and shit then Sony just had to follow somehow"

that it was factually inaccurate,

and my previous post corrected the that "claim" if I may call it as such.

even you know that Microsoft didn't invent charging for internet,

shit even Nintendo 64 charged for internet in japan.

Avatar image for Suppaman100
Suppaman100

5250

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#125 Suppaman100
Member since 2013 • 5250 Posts

@Spartan070 said:

@Suppaman100 said:

Are you butthurt that gamecube got OWNED on every front by PS2? Lol "better exclusives", pure comedy.

RE4 was best on the Gamecube, add in the best 2 games of that gen, Metroid Prime: Echoes and Metroid Prime, and the Gamecube holds its own very well.

True, Gamecube is a wonderful console. But it's no match at all against the behemoth that is Playstation 2.

Avatar image for FoxbatAlpha
FoxbatAlpha

10669

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#126 FoxbatAlpha
Member since 2009 • 10669 Posts

If anyone is going for a monopoly here it is Microsoft. They have more practice at monopoly's. Sony has more practice at fail and is showing great signs at more fail to come.

Avatar image for delta3074
delta3074

20003

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 2

User Lists: 0

#127 delta3074
Member since 2007 • 20003 Posts

@killatwill15 said:

@delta3074 said:

@killatwill15 said:

@delta3074 said:

Nah he's right man if SONY does something good it's awesome, if SONY does something bad it 's 'microsofts fault because they did it first'

I'ts pathetic really.

News flash: MS didn't start pay to play online, that would be SEGA with the dreamcast.

Also, Microsoft didn't put rootkits on music CD's first, that would be SONY,lol

how is he right?

ps2 out sold xbox og,

and ps3 caught up to 360 despite being a year late,

is about to outsell 360,

and the ps4 out selling the bone.

his concept of "making money and shit" is redundant,

and abiding @WilliamRLBaker will only lead to baldness,

and you and him will be sheens together.

Hes right because you are blatantly blaming microsoft for SONY adopting a pay to play online strategy

'thanks to the bad influence of MS, PS copied the "Xbox live rip-off" crap.'

Your words

Like i said, it's pathetic, It was SONY's decision to implement pay to play online, had NOTHING to do with MS doing it first. 'Bu-Bu-Bu, microsoft did it first ,they are to blame'

SONY fanboys at there finest 'Bu-Bu'Bu SONY are the saints of gaming'

Saints of gaming my Arse, if anybody deserves that title it would be Nintendo.

As for eh Ps2, NOT the best in every aspect, Gamecube had hands down better exclusives,lol

hey Im not blaming Microsoft for nothing,

I will even give you a chance to quote me on it.

I was only dissing that sheen @WilliamRLBaker,

but like I said, don't abide by @WilliamRLBaker,

otherwise you will rub your head in worry until you are a bald headed sheen.

the fact remains that when he said "bububububbububub it was Microsofts fault SOny never ever ever ever ever ever did anything wrong until Microsoft started you know selling games and making money and shit then Sony just had to follow somehow"

that it was factually inaccurate,

and my previous post corrected the that "claim" if I may call it as such.

even you know that Microsoft didn't invent charging for internet,

shit even Nintendo 64 charged for internet in japan.

i suggest you re-read your own quotes dude

'thanks to the bad influence of MS, PS copied the "Xbox live rip-off" crap.'

Those where YOUR OWN WORDS from YOUR OWN POST

Please explain how that is not blaming MS for anything?

Avatar image for Krelian-co
Krelian-co

13274

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 1

User Lists: 0

#128  Edited By Krelian-co
Member since 2006 • 13274 Posts

@delta3074 said:

@killatwill15 said:

@delta3074 said:

@killatwill15 said:

@delta3074 said:

Nah he's right man if SONY does something good it's awesome, if SONY does something bad it 's 'microsofts fault because they did it first'

I'ts pathetic really.

News flash: MS didn't start pay to play online, that would be SEGA with the dreamcast.

Also, Microsoft didn't put rootkits on music CD's first, that would be SONY,lol

how is he right?

ps2 out sold xbox og,

and ps3 caught up to 360 despite being a year late,

is about to outsell 360,

and the ps4 out selling the bone.

his concept of "making money and shit" is redundant,

and abiding @WilliamRLBaker will only lead to baldness,

and you and him will be sheens together.

Hes right because you are blatantly blaming microsoft for SONY adopting a pay to play online strategy

'thanks to the bad influence of MS, PS copied the "Xbox live rip-off" crap.'

Your words

Like i said, it's pathetic, It was SONY's decision to implement pay to play online, had NOTHING to do with MS doing it first. 'Bu-Bu-Bu, microsoft did it first ,they are to blame'

SONY fanboys at there finest 'Bu-Bu'Bu SONY are the saints of gaming'

Saints of gaming my Arse, if anybody deserves that title it would be Nintendo.

As for eh Ps2, NOT the best in every aspect, Gamecube had hands down better exclusives,lol

hey Im not blaming Microsoft for nothing,

I will even give you a chance to quote me on it.

I was only dissing that sheen @WilliamRLBaker,

but like I said, don't abide by @WilliamRLBaker,

otherwise you will rub your head in worry until you are a bald headed sheen.

the fact remains that when he said "bububububbububub it was Microsofts fault SOny never ever ever ever ever ever did anything wrong until Microsoft started you know selling games and making money and shit then Sony just had to follow somehow"

that it was factually inaccurate,

and my previous post corrected the that "claim" if I may call it as such.

even you know that Microsoft didn't invent charging for internet,

shit even Nintendo 64 charged for internet in japan.

i suggest you re-read your own quotes dude

'thanks to the bad influence of MS, PS copied the "Xbox live rip-off" crap.'

Those where YOUR OWN WORDS from YOUR OWN POST

Please explain how that is not blaming MS for anything?

it is microsofts fault and their xbots that consoles have to pay monthly subscription, or did i miss something? they tried to pull the same bs on pc, but pc gamers have alternatives and are not as dumb.

Avatar image for delta3074
delta3074

20003

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 2

User Lists: 0

#129 delta3074
Member since 2007 • 20003 Posts
@Suppaman100 said:

LOL, so you're denying that MS hasn't influenced Sony at all in adopting the pay to play rip off?

And LOL at the last sentences.

Are you butthurt that gamecube got OWNED on every front by PS2? Lol "better exclusives", pure comedy.

How did the PS2 own the gamecube on every front when the gamecube Had more powerful hardware?

And SONY make there own decisions, nobody held a gun to there head over pay to play online.

And yes, the Gamecube had better exclusives than the PS2 hands down, Metroid prime, MGS twin snakes, REmake, Eternal darkness, windwaker, Twighlight princess and pikmin to name a few.

Most of the best Ps2 exclusives like MGS2 ended up on other consoles and where no longer exclusive,lol

Avatar image for MlauTheDaft
MlauTheDaft

5189

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#130 MlauTheDaft
Member since 2011 • 5189 Posts

I think you're projecting a bit here.

Beware of them evil cows, right?

Avatar image for Puggy301
Puggy301

202

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 11

User Lists: 0

#131  Edited By Puggy301
Member since 2003 • 202 Posts

Oh please! I love it when M$ sycophants accuse other companies of the very thing their beloved M$ has been striving for since its creation. M$ is the most viciously predatory corporation on the planet that ALWAYS seeks to utterly destroy any and all competition so that it can operate with impunity in a monopolistic vacuum. Just study their history and you'll see.

Avatar image for The-Apostle
The-Apostle

12197

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 10

User Lists: 0

#132 The-Apostle
Member since 2004 • 12197 Posts

No. I'm a Sony fan but if we didn't have competition there would be no reason to improve.

Avatar image for cainetao11
cainetao11

38026

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 77

User Lists: 1

#133 cainetao11
Member since 2006 • 38026 Posts

@Suppaman100 said:

@WilliamRLBaker said:

@Suppaman100 said:

@charizard1605 said:

@Suppaman100 said:

Would be better than a MS or Nintendo monopoly.

This does not answer my question. Do you want a Sony monopoly?

If we're talking about the old Sony with PS1 and PS2 dominating then yes definitely. They were the best in every aspect.

But too much happened in the mean time and things changed. For example thanks to the bad influence of MS, PS copied the "Xbox live rip-off" crap.

So no.

bububububbububub it was Microsofts fault SOny never ever ever ever ever ever did anything wrong until Microsoft started you know selling games and making money and shit then Sony just had to follow somehow.

Jesus christ Sheen's are horribly stupid.

Lol keep on denying the fact that MS brought a lot of sh*t to the gaming industry.

And of course Sony did things wrong but in comparison to MS, they're saints.

Now go back to your cave lemming

Well yeah. When a fanboy is playing God, they are.

Avatar image for deactivated-5851fca92f6f5
deactivated-5851fca92f6f5

100

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#134  Edited By deactivated-5851fca92f6f5
Member since 2010 • 100 Posts

It would be a sad day for gaming if any of the three had a monopoly on gaming.

So no.

Avatar image for killatwill15
killatwill15

855

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 5

#135 killatwill15
Member since 2013 • 855 Posts

@delta3074 said:

@killatwill15 said:

@delta3074 said:

@killatwill15 said:

@delta3074 said:

Nah he's right man if SONY does something good it's awesome, if SONY does something bad it 's 'microsofts fault because they did it first'

I'ts pathetic really.

News flash: MS didn't start pay to play online, that would be SEGA with the dreamcast.

Also, Microsoft didn't put rootkits on music CD's first, that would be SONY,lol

how is he right?

ps2 out sold xbox og,

and ps3 caught up to 360 despite being a year late,

is about to outsell 360,

and the ps4 out selling the bone.

his concept of "making money and shit" is redundant,

and abiding @WilliamRLBaker will only lead to baldness,

and you and him will be sheens together.

Hes right because you are blatantly blaming microsoft for SONY adopting a pay to play online strategy

'thanks to the bad influence of MS, PS copied the "Xbox live rip-off" crap.'

Your words

Like i said, it's pathetic, It was SONY's decision to implement pay to play online, had NOTHING to do with MS doing it first. 'Bu-Bu-Bu, microsoft did it first ,they are to blame'

SONY fanboys at there finest 'Bu-Bu'Bu SONY are the saints of gaming'

Saints of gaming my Arse, if anybody deserves that title it would be Nintendo.

As for eh Ps2, NOT the best in every aspect, Gamecube had hands down better exclusives,lol

hey Im not blaming Microsoft for nothing,

I will even give you a chance to quote me on it.

I was only dissing that sheen @WilliamRLBaker,

but like I said, don't abide by @WilliamRLBaker,

otherwise you will rub your head in worry until you are a bald headed sheen.

the fact remains that when he said "bububububbububub it was Microsofts fault SOny never ever ever ever ever ever did anything wrong until Microsoft started you know selling games and making money and shit then Sony just had to follow somehow"

that it was factually inaccurate,

and my previous post corrected the that "claim" if I may call it as such.

even you know that Microsoft didn't invent charging for internet,

shit even Nintendo 64 charged for internet in japan.

i suggest you re-read your own quotes dude

'thanks to the bad influence of MS, PS copied the "Xbox live rip-off" crap.'

Those where YOUR OWN WORDS from YOUR OWN POST

Please explain how that is not blaming MS for anything?

that was suppaman100,

like I said I didn't blame no one.

or do you need an actual finger to point you to the proper point of reference?

Avatar image for hrt_rulz01
hrt_rulz01

22367

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#136 hrt_rulz01
Member since 2006 • 22367 Posts

You'd have to be pretty dumb to want any company to have a monopoly in any industry. Less competition is never good. And this is coming from a long time PS/Sony fan.

Avatar image for flashn00b
flashn00b

3949

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 3

User Lists: 0

#137 flashn00b
Member since 2006 • 3949 Posts

If Sony were to have a monopoly on the console market, they'll probably become the Games Workshop of video games 5 years later.

Avatar image for hiphops_savior
hiphops_savior

8535

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 5

User Lists: 2

#138 hiphops_savior
Member since 2007 • 8535 Posts

@YearoftheSnake5 said:

@charizard1605 said:

@nintendoboy16 said:

Oh, hell no! Hell, it's better that even Nintendo stays away from a monopoly.

Of course it is- if I had to have a monopoly in gaming, I'd go with a Sony led one. A Nintendo led monopoly would be a fucking disaster for everyone involved. Nintendo would probably find a way to milk everyone with the same products over and over and then somehow go bankrupt, even as a monopoly.

We already got a glimpse of what a Nintendo monopoly could potentially look like in the NES era. Sure, they didn't have a true monopoly at the time, but they had some really harsh policies for 3rd party developers.

To be fair, it is coming after the Atari era of unregulated gaming and oversupply of games that didn't necessarily has the demand. Nintendo brought in stability to an industry at its infancy. Today, Nintendo doesn't need to put up harsh policies thanks to ratings board.

Avatar image for Nengo_Flow
Nengo_Flow

10644

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#139 Nengo_Flow
Member since 2011 • 10644 Posts

@cainetao11 said:

@Nengo_Flow said:

no, but if there was a company that was going to be the monopoly of gaming, i rather it be SONY.

I'd rather it be Valve with Steam, in that dark, fascist world you speak of.

welp..... I was referring to console gaming

Avatar image for outworld222
outworld222

4189

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 3

User Lists: 0

#140 outworld222
Member since 2004 • 4189 Posts

Uuuum ,where are all the outspoken Sony Cows now that 85% are against this idea?? (Be it an unscientific poll, it's still a good indicator)

It would be a nightmare for most gamers if Sony had a monopoly.

Avatar image for DocSanchez
DocSanchez

5557

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 3

User Lists: 0

#141  Edited By DocSanchez
Member since 2013 • 5557 Posts

Simply not true that sony fans are worse than any other in this regard, and of course they don't want sony the only company. They want sony on top that's all, same as every other fanboy.

Avatar image for deactivated-5f19d4c9d7318
deactivated-5f19d4c9d7318

4166

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#142 deactivated-5f19d4c9d7318
Member since 2008 • 4166 Posts

No one wants a monopoly. What i do want is a competitive Nintendo and MS not to have enough power to force microtransactions, paywalls and DRM down our throats.

Avatar image for Mozelleple112
Mozelleple112

11112

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 5

User Lists: 0

#143 Mozelleple112
Member since 2011 • 11112 Posts

@mems_1224 said:

God no, that would be awful. There would be no more innovation if that happened.

That's funny, because Sony corporation has probably invented more stuff than Nintendo and Microsoft combined.

But a monopoly is RARELY good in any circumstance. competition is always good.

Avatar image for DrRockso87
DrRockso87

2647

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 2

User Lists: 0

#144 DrRockso87
Member since 2010 • 2647 Posts

@Solid_Max13 said:

This seems like trollbait but I'll tell you as a cow no I do not want any monopoly from any company competition is good for all companies and keeps a diversity, you should as the same question to lems

This.

Anyway that honestly, truthfully wants a monopoly on the industry is an idiot. Plain and simple.

Avatar image for Master_ShakeXXX
Master_ShakeXXX

13361

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 142

User Lists: 0

#145 Master_ShakeXXX
Member since 2008 • 13361 Posts

They pretty much monop'ed their first two gens and still delivered kick ass games so why not?

Avatar image for lostrib
lostrib

49999

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 1

User Lists: 0

#147 lostrib
Member since 2009 • 49999 Posts

@juarbles said:

Not necessarily but it's better than having ms anti-gaming in the industry that's a well known fact.

seriously? they let you back in again?

Avatar image for cainetao11
cainetao11

38026

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 77

User Lists: 1

#148 cainetao11
Member since 2006 • 38026 Posts

@Master_ShakeXXX said:

They pretty much monop'ed their first two gens and still delivered kick ass games so why not?

Nope. Monopoly=no viable alternative. There were both those gens.

Avatar image for SakusEnvoy
SakusEnvoy

4764

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#150  Edited By SakusEnvoy
Member since 2009 • 4764 Posts

While I don't want a Sony monopoly, I'm not sure it's necessary to have three separate dedicated game platforms every generation. I haven't been terribly impressed with Nintendo's last two home consoles, and, selfishly, I do wish they simply produced their content for other systems which are more powerful and have better DRM policies, online systems, etc. But, of course, Nintendo probably won't leave the home console market anytime soon.

There needs to be at least two, and those systems should be competitive with each other in terms of features and capabilities so that they drive the other to keep improving. Sony and Microsoft just happen to fit that bill right now with the most technically advanced and robust infrastructures.