Microsoft, change your strategy, or drop out (long read)

#301 Posted by Shewgenja (9601 posts) -

@KingsofQueens said:

LOL, I must have struck a nerve, somebody is BUTTHURT.

The X1 compared to 360 at this similar period, is doing quite well actually. Even better. MS have already reversed their policies, VERY QUICKLY, a complete opposite if you look at the PS3's miserable early months, which took them 2-3 years to get their asses in gear. Get over yourself, that or try cutting down from Kaz's protein milkshakes.

And you DON'T know anything about competition. Indeed its a Dog eat Dog industry and something bigger and better shows up. That's where the Original XBOX came in and took everybody by surprise. Gaming needs competition. Without the original XBOX, your PS platform would not have evolved into what it is today....a console having a HDD, having a decent Online Service (which still pales compared to XBL), having Trophies, having a controller with finally decent "triggers" and having a powerful Hardware. Original XBOX and 360 swept the floor with the PS2 and PS3 in Hardware design. And now, Sony has ditched the Cell. Halo inspired Killzone, a franchise dubbed as the "Halo Killer" and Forza gave GT a run for it's money.

All 3 consoles keep each other in check. All 3 consoles need a symbiotic relationship. If you can't figure that out, same as the rest of you rabid fanboys, then I suggest you guys bury heads up to your asses.

Let me tell you why you're wrong.

1. PS2 had a hard drive for games like SOCOM and FFXI among others. XBox didn't exactly change the course of history with that. More on this later.

2. Nintendo had triggers and analogs, that's not an XBox thing.

3. Online service and trophies are partially what's wrong with XBox. MSes push there artificially inflated the budgets needed for running gaming and introduced an almost unnatural evolution. One which is being over-monetized today with things like service fees, DLC and optional content for revenue.

4. PS1 was also a very developer-friendly architecture. PS4 is a return to Playstations roots.

5. Halo and KillZone aren't really all that compared to the FPSes on PC. Besides, Halo is now an outsourced franchise for all intents and purposes. Just a sign of how much MS has abandoned its direction.

PC did all of this. PC gaming is where MS got pretty much every move in its playbook and consoles have caught up. I suggest you calm down and look at reality. XBox is past its prime and everything about the Bone makes that obvious. Like I made a list of before, it's Sony that is keeping MS honest at this point. The innovation and new tricks from MS are gone.

In fact, isn't that really the point of this thread? MS being a barnacle on the bottom side of existing franchises with wallet power doesn't do anything for anyone.

MS talked about cloud. Sony has PS Now up and running.

MS talked about DX12. DriveClub and Uncharted 4 let loose a water shit all over whatever MS has to show us.

Sony is preparing to launch Virtual Reality. MS is buying timed exclusives.

MS takes it's vision for Kinect and sets it on fire. Sony launches SharePlay.

It's just not happening man. Let it go. XBox had a good run but it's over now. We have all seen what MS does in the drivers seat and it's not really all that awesome. They had the core gamer at the start of last gen. They closed studios and abandoned you for Kinect just so they could try to steal some sunshine from the Wii. It was all for naught.. We all know the Wii crowd either got transformed to core gamers or they're on iPads now. MS has mismanaged XBox so much that they have to scramble to open unproven studios just to keep their best IP like Halo and Gears of War alive. Really, I hate to be the one to break it to you and this forum, but it is high time it has been said by somebody..

The industry needs XBox for one thing and one thing only. XBox should stand, from here until the end of gaming itself, as a testament to how you can enter console gaming with a vision and then completely lose your bag of tricks by your own blundering. It hasn't been a profitable business model since day 1 on top of even all that. When December rolls by and all this talk of comparing the XBones first year to 360 becomes utterly silenced, remember what you read today. After all, if you want to know why Nintendo didn't have to bow out, it's because they've done the polar opposite of what XBox does. They stayed consistent and trustworthy to their fans. Whether times are good for Nintendo or times are bad, Nintendo delivers to its fanbase unrelentingly. Microsoft pretty much flinches with every punch. They will tell you one thing, and then like flipping a switch, do another. You better start believing in life after XBox.

#302 Posted by KingsofQueens (2217 posts) -

@Bigboi500 said:

@KingsofQueens: How exactly can you sit there so assuredly that the Microsoft console brand is invulnerable? The widening of the gap, month after month, is having a negative effect. Dreamfall is just one recent example of Microsoft losing third party games.

Nintendo can get away with not having third party support because their in-house devs are so deep, unlike Microsoft. Throwing money at a problem wont work anymore if the user base is laughable in respect to the competition. Microsoft isn't Nintendo, they can't fall back on first party games when they don't have any and haven't invested money in building them.

Microsoft doesn't have a safety net in their gaming division.

I never said the XBOX brand was invulnerable. I only said I WILL be gaming on the X1. There's no denying, unless you're a pathetic Cowturd, that the X1 is doing very well compared to it's predecessor, 360, at this time.

Dreamfall isn't any indication the XBOX brand is in dire straits at this very moment. Otherwise, a vast majority of 3rd party publishers, including indies, would be jumping off ship as we speak.

#303 Edited by lamprey263 (24132 posts) -

Lets not act like this isn't about what this is about, and that's MS getting the next Tomb Raider, boo-fucking-hoo.

I think MS could benefit from developing some strong first party studios, but I don't see anything wrong with funding third parties to make exclusives for them. I will admit that getting Tomb Raider was rather heavy handed, maybe even fiscally irresponsible and arguably that money can better be spent, but I'm not going to vilify them for it. Either way I look at deciding which console to get I'm gonna get one at the expense of not getting the other that will still have games I want.

#304 Posted by Shewgenja (9601 posts) -

@RR360DD said:

He's saying the PS4 was shaped by the 360. And he's right.

"at least the PS3 actually wasn't weaker than the 360."

When has that mattered? In any generation? Yeah, never.

"Fanboy goggles seem to be everyones problem when it comes to the XBone. The truth is, it's backpeddaling at light speed to become some kind of watered down PS4."

Just like how Sony backpeddled with the PS3 (albeit at a much slower rate). Thats the benefit of competition you know. Neither would be backpeddling if the other didn't exist. Watered down? You falling back on hardware again? Because the XOne isn't watered down in any other sense.

This whole make way for someone new stance from cows is a joke. Theres no unwritten rule there can be only 3 console manufacturers. If one of these other companies wanted to create a games console, they'd do it. They don't need to wait for MS to leave. If Xbox leaves, nothing will replace it. Its just a cows wet dream.

PS4 being shaped by 360 is irrelevant. Why wasn't the XBone shaped by the 360?

When has power mattered? Well, aside from pointing to every resolution and framerate thread over the past year and a half, let's talk about how power helped the SNES overcome the Genesis. Yes, power matters for consoles not selling themselves on a novelty.

There's only room in the console business for three main players. There have been quite a few times where someone tried to play fourth fiddle and they lost their ass. CD-i and 3DO say whassup. Speaking of wet dreams, calling me a Cow just because I'm not roses and kittens over the XBox is getting you nowhere. I figured I'd point that out, since quite literally, it's only Lemmings who try to bring that up as a talking point when arguing me.

#305 Posted by Shewgenja (9601 posts) -

Hell, let's cut it straight here. For what MS spent to market Kinect and get an NFL deal, they probably could have launched a handheld. Forget the shit loads of new IP or resurrecting Rare franchises and whatnot that could have been done with that.

#306 Edited by Bigboi500 (29999 posts) -

As I said the 360 was influential, but for good or bad? If it didn't exist, would Sony now be charging a monthly fee to play online? Would AAA devs be nickle and diming us on consoles with petty DLC content that should be on-disc? Guess we'll never know.

#307 Posted by Shewgenja (9601 posts) -

@Bigboi500 said:

As I said the 360 was influential, but for good or bad? If it didn't exist, would Sony now be charging a monthly fee to play online? Would AAA devs be nickle and diming us on consoles with petty DLC content that should be on-disc? Guess we'll never know.

Exactly!

#308 Posted by Spitfire-Six (522 posts) -

Sony is the big dog, they took the gaming industry from Nintendo, while Nintendo pretended nothing was happening. No one else could compete with them at all. So all is right with gaming right now it has reached back to its normal state. Sony SHOULD be ahead of Microsoft they have been in the industry longer, they acquired a larger library of games through aggressive tactics. Microsoft got ahead of Sony last gen only partially due to their own merit (Unified Shaders) Sony's mistakes is what put them where they were If they had continued the success of the PS1 or PS2 no one would have been surprised.

Sony is to Gaming what Microsoft is to Software engineering.

#309 Edited by nyzma23 (929 posts) -

Wait people want microsoft out of gaming? lol microsoft have $85 billion in CA$H ,that is more than enough to buy entire gaming industry and burn it to ground so you fanboy can stop fighting for plastic

#310 Edited by Shewgenja (9601 posts) -

@spitfire-six said:

Sony is the big dog, they took the gaming industry from Nintendo, while Nintendo pretended nothing was happening. No one else could compete with them at all. So all is right with gaming right now it has reached back to its normal state. Sony SHOULD be ahead of Microsoft they have been in the industry longer, they acquired a larger library of games through aggressive tactics. Microsoft got ahead of Sony last gen only partially due to their own merit (Unified Shaders) Sony's mistakes is what put them where they were If they had continued the success of the PS1 or PS2 no one would have been surprised.

Sony is to Gaming what Microsoft is to Software engineering.

I look at things way different. I remember a time when Atari pretty much WAS the industry. Then along came a little company called Nintendo and a gen later, there was no Atari. A generation after that, Playstation became a thing. The players come and they go, but no one is too big to get kicked out of the console race. Who knows, someone may come along and utterly bury Playstation one day and do for gaming what Nintendo did back in the 80s and early 90's as a result.

For now, in Generation 8, Sony is the industry again and XBox is looking completely replaceable. Just like Atari was in the early 90's and Sega in the early 00's. The way I see it, XBox abandoned gamers back in 2009/2010. Seems like every decade someone gets booted out of the running.

#311 Posted by Ribnarak (2298 posts) -

for starters, i think MS needs to come out and admit (not explicitly) but just accept that their console is inferior at this point in terms of hardware and Stop bsing about how its the best system to play on, etc. THey also need to come out and tell us what the "CLOUD" is all about: is it all hype by consumers or is it an actual thing. If it isn't real and isn't useful in gaming, then tell the consumer. It's stuff like this that makes them seem shady. Ofcourse all businesses are shady to an extent , nintendo, sony, etc. BUt MS does it in such a blatant way that its actually quite noticeable. So on that point, i agree that there needs to be a change (A culture change) .

next gen: come out and give the best console they can offer and focus on the gamer. FORGET these 2ndary incentives ( like social stuff), just focus on giving a powerful console that plays well.

#312 Posted by Spitfire-Six (522 posts) -

@Shewgenja said:

@spitfire-six said:

Sony is the big dog, they took the gaming industry from Nintendo, while Nintendo pretended nothing was happening. No one else could compete with them at all. So all is right with gaming right now it has reached back to its normal state. Sony SHOULD be ahead of Microsoft they have been in the industry longer, they acquired a larger library of games through aggressive tactics. Microsoft got ahead of Sony last gen only partially due to their own merit (Unified Shaders) Sony's mistakes is what put them where they were If they had continued the success of the PS1 or PS2 no one would have been surprised.

Sony is to Gaming what Microsoft is to Software engineering.

I look at things way different. I remember a time when Atari pretty much WAS the industry. Then along came a little company called Nintendo and a gen later, there was no Atari. A generation after that, Playstation became a thing. The players come and they go, but no one is too big to get kicked out of the console race. Who knows, someone may come along and utterly bury Playstation one day and do for gaming what Nintendo did back in the 80s and early 90's as a result.

For now, in Generation 8, Sony is the industry again and XBox is looking completely replaceable. Just like Atari was in the early 90's and Sega in the early 00's. The way I see it, XBox abandoned gamers back in 2009/2010. Seems like every decade someone gets booted out of the running.

I would agree with you but Atari was pretty much dead, and they were not really pushing things forward. Game industry didn't become mainstream until Nintendo. Nintendo Dominated the Industry until they were too slow to convert to cd rom and that left Playstation the opening. If nintendo and Ps didnt fall out who knows where we would be. I don't think there was a real disbelief that Sony was the one in charge last gen I think Microsoft took advantage and furthered the Xbox brand but if it wasn't for playstation blunders that could still not be the case. Anything Microsoft does or has done in the game sphere they learned from Sony.

#313 Edited by Ghost120x (3909 posts) -

MS would rather spend on ads than to make new game studios.They think that they can sell same games over and over again and market it to hell and everyone will just buy it. The thing is, the only company that works for is Nintendo.

The difference with Nintendo is they have a ton of ips that they can cycle through if they want. For example we haven't seen a metroid game in quite some time but we know there will be one when the time is right. Also even if Nintendo only sells Mario games it still wouldn't be as bad as MS because Mario can be found in many genres of games.

#314 Posted by Opus_Rea-333 (985 posts) -

@charizard1605 said:

@Opus_Rea-333 said:

Sony ponies wishlist to Microsoft:

1- Dont buy 3rd party exclusives (it really hurts PS4 but shhh dont tell)

2- Timed exclusives should be only for 47 hours (1-2 years timed exclusives hurt our PS4 somehow)

3- You can buy DLC (it is pointless since it wont affect Ps4 negatively that much except for COD DLC but shhh)

Did you call me a Sony pony? xD

:D not at all.. I always enjoy your thread even if some are mostly opinion but this is System Wars :D opinions mixed with facts can only make System wars even better...

cheers charizard..

;)

#315 Posted by -RocBoys9489- (6269 posts) -

@Shewgenja said:

@-RocBoys9489- said:

http://www.geekwire.com/2012/microsofts-entertainment-division-diverse-profitable/

There's no such thing as an Xbox gaming division. Which is why its so hard to speculate on how much money the Xbox brand itself makes and loses for MS since all the sales figures are bundled in with other brands/products in Entertainment and Devices. The only major setbacks to the division as a whole that we can speculate on were the buyout of Nokia, Skype, and R&D for the Xbox One. Obviously these were investments and time will tell if they'll pay off. The division as a whole mad billions in profit between 2009 and 2012. The 360 was a major success for MS, nobody can deny that.

Remember this the next time you want to talk hot shit to someone when you don't know your busted ass hole from your face. Talking that good shit to daddy will get smacked the fuck down. Do you kiss your mom with that mouth? For all that talk of dicks in mouth you seem like the expert around here. Stay in 2012 where it is safe. The future called and said XBox One sucks -With love, 2014

Jesus Christ son, did you take your prescription this morning?

#316 Posted by delta3074 (18410 posts) -

@Suppaman100 said:

@delta3074 said:

@Suppaman100 said:

@Zaibach said:

Had Sony been more competitive last gen instead of shitting the bed, MS would have been forced to create some new IPs of its own instead of relying on the trifecta of Forza, Gears and Halo. After rinsing and repeating this formula with great success, they had no incentive to really bolster their 1st party. And then enter Kinect to deal the deafening blow to the outcry for new Ips

Lol, so it's Sony's fault now?

Every rational gamer knows it. MS needs to GTFO of the gaming industry, ...no that's also not right, they should get out of the console industry.

Loved MS in the 90's with Age of empires,... MS should go back to making games, not consoles.

MS did more bad to the console industry than good.

BS, i am a rational gamer who has been gaming for 29 years and i think the 360 was one of the best consoles ever produced gamewise.

Microsoft did more bad than good? having a HDD as standard is Bad? standardising online play on consoles is bad? Allowing you to install Full games to the HDD for the first time on consoles is bad?

You have a very BAD idea of what is bad for gaming dude.

You don't want MS out of the console Industry for any RATIONAL reason, you just don't like them because you are a SONY drone.

Hahaha another emotional lemming response.

The sh*t they pulled (and wanted to) FAR outweighs the good things they did for the gaming industry. HDD, standardizing online play,... is nohting compared to the sh*t they did. And btw these points you summed up are up for debate. Online play, HDD's,... was more of natural evolution imo.

And lol that you think 360 was one of the best console ever, you really have low standards then. Forgot about RROD? Forgot about the afwul second half of the console's life? Forgot that 360 was left dead and abandoned after a few years, meanwhile (PS3) still has support and gets new exclusives (tales of, P5,...)

And the topic is about MS's almost non existing first-party support, what do you have to say about that? You're supporting that crap too or what lem?

Firstly, when i sadi the 360 was one of the best consoles ever made i said,quite clearly 'Gamewise' i wasn't talking about Reliability,i suggest you learn to read, but to be honest, my favorite console of all time, the Ps1, i had to replace MORE times than my 360's.

Secondly, all i see is Blah,Blah, Blah the Shit MS pulled without ANY Examples of what those things Actually are, typical Cow, cannot back up your own statement with any sort of Evidence whatsoever.

I don't do ' it is because i say so' BS dude, Provide examples of what they have done thats been bad for the industry or shut the Hell up.

Of course i am a lemming (sarcasm) every one who disagrees with the Rabid SONY drones on this board is a lemming to Rabid SONY drones,lol

Why are you asking me to answer on Topic when you are not even 'on topic' yourself dude, get a life man

#317 Posted by delta3074 (18410 posts) -
@Krelian-co said:

@delta3074 said:

Typical Cow, why don't you actually use your brain and address the points i make instead of being a Dick, i AM a rational Gamer and i HAVE been gaming for 29 years, before you where out of nappies no doubt, anyway , i digress.

How is having a HDD as standard bad for the industry?

How is installing full games to your HDD on consoles a bad thing?

How is standardised online play a bad thing?

How are achievements a bad thing?

All these things MS did first and are actually good for gamers and good for the industry.

Now why don't you dig deep, find those Debating Skills and list all the things that you feel MS has done that are bad for the industry and actually try and debunk my points instead of veiled personal insults

stop crying ffs.

thanks for proving my point, that you are an idiot:)

#318 Posted by charizard1605 (58094 posts) -

@93BlackHawk93 said:

I should make that my sig.

#319 Edited by RR360DD (11979 posts) -

@Shewgenja said:

@RR360DD said:

He's saying the PS4 was shaped by the 360. And he's right.

"at least the PS3 actually wasn't weaker than the 360."

When has that mattered? In any generation? Yeah, never.

"Fanboy goggles seem to be everyones problem when it comes to the XBone. The truth is, it's backpeddaling at light speed to become some kind of watered down PS4."

Just like how Sony backpeddled with the PS3 (albeit at a much slower rate). Thats the benefit of competition you know. Neither would be backpeddling if the other didn't exist. Watered down? You falling back on hardware again? Because the XOne isn't watered down in any other sense.

This whole make way for someone new stance from cows is a joke. Theres no unwritten rule there can be only 3 console manufacturers. If one of these other companies wanted to create a games console, they'd do it. They don't need to wait for MS to leave. If Xbox leaves, nothing will replace it. Its just a cows wet dream.

PS4 being shaped by 360 is irrelevant. Why wasn't the XBone shaped by the 360?

When has power mattered? Well, aside from pointing to every resolution and framerate thread over the past year and a half, let's talk about how power helped the SNES overcome the Genesis. Yes, power matters for consoles not selling themselves on a novelty.

There's only room in the console business for three main players. There have been quite a few times where someone tried to play fourth fiddle and they lost their ass. CD-i and 3DO say whassup. Speaking of wet dreams, calling me a Cow just because I'm not roses and kittens over the XBox is getting you nowhere. I figured I'd point that out, since quite literally, it's only Lemmings who try to bring that up as a talking point when arguing me.

Its not irrelevant. We were talking about competition. As said above, MS forced Sony into pulling their heads out of their asses last gen, and this gen the roles are reversed. Of course the XOne was shaped by the 360.

So it matters in SW. In other words, it doesn't matter at all. Thanks for clarifying.

MS started developing the Xbox in 1998. They didn't care that Nintendo, Sony and Sega were all in the market. They couldn't have known the Dreamcast would fail. Theres nothing stopping a fourth company now entering the market. Especially with Nintendo going off on their own tangent. Reality is, no one would replace MS.

You can't genuinely believe someone like Samsung would create a dedicated games console with hardware that rivals the XOne/PS4 and then build up a group of first party studios.

I call you a cow because you bash the XOne and defend the PS4 any occasion you get. I don't give a shit if you game primarily on the PC or whatever. Its how you're perceived around here. #dealwithit

#320 Posted by Shewgenja (9601 posts) -

@RR360DD said:

Its not irrelevant. We were talking about competition. As said above, MS forced Sony into pulling their heads out of their asses last gen, and this gen the roles are reversed. Of course the XOne was shaped by the 360.

So it matters in SW. In other words, it doesn't matter at all. Thanks for clarifying.

MS started developing the Xbox in 1998. They didn't care that Nintendo, Sony and Sega were all in the market. They couldn't have known the Dreamcast would fail. Theres nothing stopping a fourth company now entering the market. Especially with Nintendo going off on their own tangent. Reality is, no one would replace MS.

You can't genuinely believe someone like Samsung would create a dedicated games console with hardware that rivals the XOne/PS4 and then build up a group of first party studios.

I call you a cow because you bash the XOne and defend the PS4 any occasion you get. I don't give a shit if you game primarily on the PC or whatever. Its how you're perceived around here. #dealwithit

But it is fading to irrelevance.

And don't think for a second that XBone is making a PS3-like comeback. XBox doesn't have the global presence. It never nurtured it. Sony did so by buying studios around the world during the latter half of PS1 and throughout the PS2 era. Playstations global appeal isn't just some kind of brand-name preference or an accident.

Everything that should have been done during the 360 era wasn't done. The industry doesn't really need XBox. By the way, you can buy a Steambox right now. That is your most likely contender for that third spot. Valve is probably just waiting for a Microsoft exit strategy announcement to go big with marketing Steambox.

#321 Edited by Speak_Low (1097 posts) -

@delta3074 said:
@Krelian-co said:

@delta3074 said:

Typical Cow, why don't you actually use your brain and address the points i make instead of being a Dick, i AM a rational Gamer and i HAVE been gaming for 29 years, before you where out of nappies no doubt, anyway , i digress.

How is having a HDD as standard bad for the industry?

How is installing full games to your HDD on consoles a bad thing?

How is standardised online play a bad thing?

How are achievements a bad thing?

All these things MS did first and are actually good for gamers and good for the industry.

Now why don't you dig deep, find those Debating Skills and list all the things that you feel MS has done that are bad for the industry and actually try and debunk my points instead of veiled personal insults

stop crying ffs.

thanks for proving my point, that you are an idiot:)

delta, you made some good points there. I'm a Sony fan but people make it out like MS did everything bad and nothing good the whole time they've been in the industry.

Currently, Nintendo is stupid as hell and don't know what they're doing, but one would have to be blind and delusional to say they haven't innovated before and made certain controller/console features standard in the industry. But it seems impossible for some to say MS contributed anything (they can't even admit to one thing they've done. Making them say it is like making a kid eat vegetables!)

And the DLC thing and how "evil" it is is another exaggeration. I'm not even sure if MS really created it (couldn't you sort of find something similar from PC and other games before the Xbox 360 arrived in the form of expansion paks?)

Maybe the 360 helped popularize DLC. But if not them, it was going to happen anyways and sped up by someone else (like Sony). And not all DLC should or could be included on the disc - that's only in a dream world. Some DLC is not even related to the main storyline (zombie modes, quirky map packs, Infamous:SS DLC for the female character, RDR's "Undead Nightmare", etc) and developers cannot delay a game another 3-6 months to finish all DLC.

A lot of the content is "wait and see", as in, wait and see if the game is a surefire hit or not. If it is, then continue with DLC development. I don't think every DLC is an attempt by developers to rip us off. Many times they're a response to consumer enthusiasm and demand, and even a sort of 'thank you' for fan loyalty. Not all DLC is evil.

#322 Posted by j_assassin (908 posts) -

@blackace: kinda like when 360 was released, and we all know what happened after ... Sony needs to be on the lead if we want m$ to really show us that theyre really gonna focus on games with x1, its for you lemmings' benefit aswell

#323 Posted by s0ldier69 (2096 posts) -

And yet they have Halo, which trumps everything else you put up there. Thanks for playing. Bye.

#324 Posted by LJS9502_basic (151379 posts) -

@j_assassin said:

@blackace: kinda like when 360 was released, and we all know what happened after ... Sony needs to be on the lead if we want m$ to really show us that theyre really gonna focus on games with x1, its for you lemmings' benefit aswell

Well the PS3 was more expensive. That's a hard sell all things being equal. But really what regions of the world has MS dominated during their time in the console market? Very few. And this gen.....some of those buyers switched. Not everyone buys multiple consoles.

The only thing about the 360 sales that might be skewed is repurchases because consoles died RROD. And while I'm not going to say it inflated their sales.....it did create some duplicate sales. Which means the penetration wasn't quite as staggering as it would seem. And finally....MS has never led a generation. So it's going to be a hard road for MS being as behind as they are.

I'm not saying you can't have fun with your X1 if you purchased it. And you will probably get the majority of games on it. I'm not going to moan about graphics etc. I only care if games are great to play so I'm not bothered by the X1 not being as powerful.

But you must admit MS shot themselves in the foot this gen. Nothing but bad PR after E3 2013 which is a battle from which to recover. Best case I see MS a decent second this gen. Worst case.....Nintendo unseats them.

Now I know the fan boys are going to cry about this post....but I am being honest here. Really I do look at these events dispassionately. And before anyone thinks they know what I game on....it's everything. I just like games.

#325 Edited by sirk1264 (5560 posts) -

Microsoft did some things great with making online multiplayer work on consoles. However, their first party support is atrocious. Exclusives help differentiate your system from your competitors. Sony and Nintendo have a large amount of first party offerings. Only reason why Nintendo struggles is because of lack of third party support. Microsoft enjoyed a year head start last gen but who knows what would have happened if Sony launched at the same time and at a better price than 600 dollars. Microsoft probably wouldn't have done as well as they did. Can't rely on third party and timed exclusives forever. Eventually that strategy doesn't work anymore. If they just invest on first party games them the xbox one would be a killer console to have. As it stands now it's a good console but there is potential for it to be even better.

#326 Posted by happyduds77 (1472 posts) -

@FoxbatAlpha said:

Microsoft marches to its own beat. While Sony and Nintendo have more first party, it is no industry standard.

I am happy with what they offer. The whole quantity and quality thing will always be present. Plus, games on that list are dead and gone never to be seen again, possibly. So it isn't like it is a active list. Just saying.

I'm pretty sure you will be happy even if Microsoft offered you a big pile of shit without the need of MS convincing you it's actually good.

#327 Edited by Krelian-co (11158 posts) -

@delta3074 said:
@Krelian-co said:

@delta3074 said:

Typical Cow, why don't you actually use your brain and address the points i make instead of being a Dick, i AM a rational Gamer and i HAVE been gaming for 29 years, before you where out of nappies no doubt, anyway , i digress.

How is having a HDD as standard bad for the industry?

How is installing full games to your HDD on consoles a bad thing?

How is standardised online play a bad thing?

How are achievements a bad thing?

All these things MS did first and are actually good for gamers and good for the industry.

Now why don't you dig deep, find those Debating Skills and list all the things that you feel MS has done that are bad for the industry and actually try and debunk my points instead of veiled personal insults

stop crying ffs.

thanks for proving my point, that you are an idiot:)

nah the point is i don't care what you say so you are delusional to think i would waste my time replying to you xD

i only use logic and arguments with smart people not with delusional fanboys.

#328 Posted by jsmoke03 (12923 posts) -

well in the end, even if you want to exclude the business side of things, its what drives the creation of new things.

microsoft, as well as sony and ninty, should bring more new ips for us gamers to enjoy BUT as sony said , if they released 10 ips....only a couple of them actually take care of profits for all 10....and some companies arent okay with that. MS still hasnt made a profit yet so they are going to lean heavily on what works. Halo, gears, forza works...

but i think they are going to learn eventually, and when they do, everyone else better look out. I actually think out of the big 3, they have a keen eye for blockbusters.

but hey it seems like the lemmings like not having new ips...they like third party games

#329 Posted by Spitfire-Six (522 posts) -

@jsmoke03 said:

well in the end, even if you want to exclude the business side of things, its what drives the creation of new things.

microsoft, as well as sony and ninty, should bring more new ips for us gamers to enjoy BUT as sony said , if they released 10 ips....only a couple of them actually take care of profits for all 10....and some companies arent okay with that. MS still hasnt made a profit yet so they are going to lean heavily on what works. Halo, gears, forza works...

but i think they are going to learn eventually, and when they do, everyone else better look out. I actually think out of the big 3, they have a keen eye for blockbusters.

but hey it seems like the lemmings like not having new ips...they like third party games

Source

#330 Posted by clr84651 (5486 posts) -

@super600 said:

@clr84651 said:

The fact is that the gaming community is better off when Sony is doing better than MS.

Proof; Sony forced MS to not do DRM, used game fees, & mandatory kinect which all make gaming better for the consumer.

Sony brought Bluray discs into gaming which both now use and are better for gaming.

MS started this online charging BS which Sony now does in order to compete against MS. Bad for gamers.

Point is when MS is successful at something that's bad for the gamer like charging for online then it becomes standard.

When Sony is successful at something like stopping DRM, used game fees, or mandatory camera then it's good for gamers.

MS sucks for the gamer & Sony is good for the gamer.

Sony only cares about your money like MS. They will do anything to get your money.

Thing is who charged for online gaming long before the other? Who wanted used game fees? Who charged me $79 for a WiFi adaptor & $13 for each charge n play kit? Sony both are built in at no extra cost.

Name 1 thing Sony did that costs the gamer more that now MS has also done that costs the gamer more.

Yes Sony wants money. At least they're not as eager to charge for things as MS.

#331 Posted by delta3074 (18410 posts) -

@Krelian-co said:

@delta3074 said:
@Krelian-co said:

@delta3074 said:

Typical Cow, why don't you actually use your brain and address the points i make instead of being a Dick, i AM a rational Gamer and i HAVE been gaming for 29 years, before you where out of nappies no doubt, anyway , i digress.

How is having a HDD as standard bad for the industry?

How is installing full games to your HDD on consoles a bad thing?

How is standardised online play a bad thing?

How are achievements a bad thing?

All these things MS did first and are actually good for gamers and good for the industry.

Now why don't you dig deep, find those Debating Skills and list all the things that you feel MS has done that are bad for the industry and actually try and debunk my points instead of veiled personal insults

stop crying ffs.

thanks for proving my point, that you are an idiot:)

nah the point is i don't care what you say so you are delusional to think i would waste my time replying to you xD

i only use logic and arguments with smart people not with delusional fanboys.

'Delusional Fanboy' oh the F***ing irony.

and i have NEVER seen you use Logic and arguments, i made some Valid and good points and the reason you don't want to debate about it is because everything i said was absolutely spot on and you have absolutely NOTHING to counter it.

It would kill a SONY drone like yourself to Acknowledge that anybody has done anything for the games industry other than SONY.

Kinda makes me laugh actually, SONY have only been in the console industry since the 5th Gen but Cows act as if they somehow invented console gaming.

#332 Posted by delta3074 (18410 posts) -

@speak_low said:

@delta3074 said:
@Krelian-co said:

@delta3074 said:

Typical Cow, why don't you actually use your brain and address the points i make instead of being a Dick, i AM a rational Gamer and i HAVE been gaming for 29 years, before you where out of nappies no doubt, anyway , i digress.

How is having a HDD as standard bad for the industry?

How is installing full games to your HDD on consoles a bad thing?

How is standardised online play a bad thing?

How are achievements a bad thing?

All these things MS did first and are actually good for gamers and good for the industry.

Now why don't you dig deep, find those Debating Skills and list all the things that you feel MS has done that are bad for the industry and actually try and debunk my points instead of veiled personal insults

stop crying ffs.

thanks for proving my point, that you are an idiot:)

delta, you made some good points there. I'm a Sony fan but people make it out like MS did everything bad and nothing good the whole time they've been in the industry.

Currently, Nintendo is stupid as hell and don't know what they're doing, but one would have to be blind and delusional to say they haven't innovated before and made certain controller/console features standard in the industry. But it seems impossible for some to say MS contributed anything (they can't even admit to one thing they've done. Making them say it is like making a kid eat vegetables!)

And the DLC thing and how "evil" it is is another exaggeration. I'm not even sure if MS really created it (couldn't you sort of find something similar from PC and other games before the Xbox 360 arrived in the form of expansion paks?)

Maybe the 360 helped popularize DLC. But if not them, it was going to happen anyways and sped up by someone else (like Sony). And not all DLC should or could be included on the disc - that's only in a dream world. Some DLC is not even related to the main storyline (zombie modes, quirky map packs, Infamous:SS DLC for the female character, RDR's "Undead Nightmare", etc) and developers cannot delay a game another 3-6 months to finish all DLC.

A lot of the content is "wait and see", as in, wait and see if the game is a surefire hit or not. If it is, then continue with DLC development. I don't think every DLC is an attempt by developers to rip us off. Many times they're a response to consumer enthusiasm and demand, and even a sort of 'thank you' for fan loyalty. Not all DLC is evil.

Wow, one of the best posts i have seen in ages and i agree with every single one of your points, especially about DLC and the Fact that not every developer is out to rip you off and it has been around a lot longer than the 360 but i do think that MS where one of the first companys to charge for DLC, which isn't a bad thing, people tend to Forget that all the Money goes back into the industry in one way or another.

And Nintendo, yeah, it's hard to actually see what they are actually doing, they had it with the gamecube, the wii was a commercial success but not poular with most gamers and they really pulled a dreamcast with the Wii-U, although i intend on getting one for Zelda and Windwaker the lack of 3rd party support (again) is rather disconcerting.

I won't be getting an Xbone or a Ps4 anytime soon, it's really alarming how many of the games are still being released on the 360 and Ps3, Fallout 4 could have got me to upgrade but, again, it's being released on the 360, it feels like dropping 400 quid on nothing more than a graphics upgrade personally.

#333 Posted by kingsfan_0333 (1618 posts) -

Am I the only one who honestly doesn't care?

If I can buy or rent a game, play it, and enjoy it, why do I care if people who own other consoles can play it as well? Lots of great games on every console.

Am I not nerdy enough or something?

#334 Posted by slimdogmilionar (561 posts) -

Honestly after seeing Gamescom it's starting to look like M$ is going to be as bullheaded and arrogant as ever, and I'm one who favors XBL because the majority of my playtime is online play. When they said they had a big suprise I was thinking a new ip or something but instead we see more exclusive DLC (timed), indies pegged first to console on XB1, and finally the TR exclusive deal. Everything else we saw were games that we already new were coming. Granted I watched both shows and I do think M$ had the better showing, but PS4 sold 10 mil already, they have to realize that buying exclusive deals left and right means nothing to gamers right now, they did that last gen and it worked out but most of us from last gen got tired of waiting for M$ to bring new IP's and bought PS3 because of the variety of games and exclusives. There are a couple of ip's not out in the open that look good like Scalebound, Mercury, and Phantom Dust, but I still feel like M$ are not putting their money and resources to good use.

Like I said I favor XBL for online play but at this point M$ is looking just plain stupid and stingy, Sony lives for the gamers despite them being broke they gave us PS+ with better offerings than M$ even though they have to pay for the games. Why do I get more value from my PS+ free games than my GWG? If both companies have to pay for the games why does it seem that the struggling company is giving more and better free games than the company worth more than 15 times what they are?

M$ needs to stop trying to buy us and instead wow us.(gonna have to tweet that to Spencer)

#335 Posted by Shewgenja (9601 posts) -

Just replace Seaworld with XBox and whales with video games.

Sad, but true.

#336 Posted by bforrester420 (1654 posts) -

@ghostwarrior786 said:

wow so even sheeps are damage controlling the tomb raider announcement. this truly is unprecedented

Nobody gives a flying fuck about the Tomb Raider franchise. I haven't played one of those since PS1.

#337 Posted by hiphops_savior (7939 posts) -

@charizard1605: Yeah, you should. Persona 4 is becoming old hat. :P

#338 Posted by hiphops_savior (7939 posts) -
@Ghost120x said:

MS would rather spend on ads than to make new game studios.They think that they can sell same games over and over again and market it to hell and everyone will just buy it. The thing is, the only company that works for is Nintendo.

The difference with Nintendo is they have a ton of ips that they can cycle through if they want. For example we haven't seen a metroid game in quite some time but we know there will be one when the time is right. Also even if Nintendo only sells Mario games it still wouldn't be as bad as MS because Mario can be found in many genres of games.

Here's a concept that would prove shocking to you. Nintendo only makes sequels to games with ideas that are interesting. It might not always work, and in certain cases (cough, NSMB2, cough), prove to be far too gimmicky to add real depth.

Take Kid Icarus for example. It was a oneshot IP that lay dormant after NES, only reemerging in Brawl. Five years later, Kid Icarus: Uprising was released. Sakurai took the concept of stylus controls and implemented in the Kid Icarus universe, which turns out to be surprisingly deep (trolling goddesses and cynical alter-ego aside).

Contrast Kid Icarus with Killzone: Shadow Fall Intercept DLC. Mark Walton called it

...a technically competent add-on that feels like it was designed to latch onto a growing co-op trend and to plug a gap in the game's multiplayer repertoire because the market research said to, rather than something designed with some real heart and soul behind it.

#339 Posted by jdc6305 (3890 posts) -

I've been gaming since the Atari days. I've seen a lot of companies come and go. Microsoft is the worst company I've ever seen in gaming. As far as I'm concerned they've done nothing but damage to the industry.

#340 Edited by LegatoSkyheart (25520 posts) -

@Suppaman100: I completely agree with the gafer.

#341 Posted by SuddenlyTragic (773 posts) -

Microsoft really needs to revive the Project Gotham franchise. I'm assuming they have completely pushed it to the side and made Forza their only racing franchise, but I fucking loved those games (except for the fourth one, it was just decent compared with 1-3). PGR1 was a great launch title and companion to Halo, PGR2 was one of the first great online console racing games, and PGR3 just added to what made the series so great while adding some stunning graphics to show off the power of the Xbox 360. It was one of the most addicting games I've ever played and so rewarding when you did well. Stringing together power slides and other combo moves to get the most "kudos" was so much fun and really set it apart from other racing games. It was the perfect balance between an arcade racer and a sim. Perfect balance.

#342 Posted by Zethrickk382 (182 posts) -

@jdc6305: "I've been gaming since the Atari days. I've seen a lot of companies come and go. Microsoft is the worst company I've ever seen in gaming. As far as I'm concerned they've done nothing but damage to the industry."

Agreed, Nothing of value would be lost. Imo

#343 Edited by charizard1605 (58094 posts) -

@hiphops_savior said:

@charizard1605: Yeah, you should. Persona 4 is becoming old hat. :P

Okay, you're gonna have to help me out here, which of my posts was this in response to? :p

#344 Posted by LJS9502_basic (151379 posts) -

@kingsfan_0333 said:

Am I the only one who honestly doesn't care?

If I can buy or rent a game, play it, and enjoy it, why do I care if people who own other consoles can play it as well? Lots of great games on every console.

Am I not nerdy enough or something?

Well you seem to short sighted about the ramifications for the industry....don't worry...it will affect you as well down the line.

#345 Posted by kingsfan_0333 (1618 posts) -

@LJS9502_basic said:

@kingsfan_0333 said:

Am I the only one who honestly doesn't care?

If I can buy or rent a game, play it, and enjoy it, why do I care if people who own other consoles can play it as well? Lots of great games on every console.

Am I not nerdy enough or something?

Well you seem to short sighted about the ramifications for the industry....don't worry...it will affect you as well down the line.

So I've heard before.

Many...many...times. I'll dig my tinfoil hat out of the attic.

#346 Posted by Douevenlift_bro (5222 posts) -

Perfect post charizard.

I wonder what the apologists will say... *sigh*