By using this site, you agree to our Privacy Policy and our Terms of Use. Close

Forums - Gaming Discussion - I don't understand how anyone could ever trust MS's Next after this gen :/

 

Do you still trust MS enough to get their Next Console?

Yes 265 34.06%
 
No 512 65.81%
 
Total:777
amp316 on 23 February 2013
Trunkin said:
kain_kusanagi said:

Has anyone else tried Reese's Puffs cereal? It's like candy. I don't even poor milk on it, I just eat them as a snack dry. I'm not kidding it's freaking candy.

Anyone else have a good cereal suggestion?


Try General Mills Oatmeal Crisp. It's like heaven. Crunchy, oatmealy heaven.

Krave is another great cereal. It consists of tiny weat bars filled with creamy chocolate. I eat it for dessert, but I guess it could be breakfast too.


No more cereal talk.  Heed my warning above.



Proud member of the SONIC SUPPORT SQUAD

Tag "Sorry man. Someone pissed in my Wheaties."

"There are like ten games a year that sell over a million units."  High Voltage CEO -  Eric Nofsinger

Around the Network
Chris Hu on 23 February 2013
disolitude said:
techhunter80 said:

Chris Hu said:

I'm not a big cereal eater but I had a cereal that tasted like Big Red (red cream soda) a couple of month ago that was very interesting.  I had Reese's Puffs cereal a couple of times I liked it a lot also.

Big Red! Man it has been so long since I had one of those. I really miss having them now.

Damn it people!

I'm on a gluten free diet so its very hard for me to find good cereal. Best I found so far Leapin Lemurs. Look it up, its no Reese's Puffs that's for sure...


Kinda looks like Reese's Puffs.  Don't really know what foods I'm aleric to haven't had any noticable reaction to any food so far.



Chris Hu on 23 February 2013
techhunter80 said:

Chris Hu said:

I'm not a big cereal eater but I had a cereal that tasted like Big Red (red cream soda) a couple of month ago that was very interesting.  I had Reese's Puffs cereal a couple of times I liked it a lot also.

Big Red! Man it has been so long since I had one of those. I really miss having them now.


Big Red is almost as easy to find a Dr. Pepper here in Texas.



amp316 on 23 February 2013

Sorry, but I'm locking this thread. The alternative is banning several of you for derailing. Keep this sort of thing up and many people are going to get banned.



Proud member of the SONIC SUPPORT SQUAD

Tag "Sorry man. Someone pissed in my Wheaties."

"There are like ten games a year that sell over a million units."  High Voltage CEO -  Eric Nofsinger

forevercloud3000 on 23 February 2013
biggamejames79 said:
The most "hardcore" gamers are the ones that spend the most time playing, I can't think of multiplayer games that anyone plays more than Halo, Gears Of War, and Call Of Duty. COD sells best on Xbox 360, therefore it has the highest number of "hardcore" gamers.

ps3 seems to be a good system for people who like niche titles and action adventure games, or games that aren't really "hardcore."

hmmm, I don't entirely disagree with this.

MS might see that as long as they give those few very strong experiences they make up for the lack of quantity. I see how that works for THEM as a company, I just don't understand how thats ok with the gamers.

360 gamers buy many different games. It just so happens that hmmmm, ball parking it, 85% of them are multiplatform titles. Most PS3 games sold are MP too, don't get me wrong, but there is a nice sprinkling of Exclusives in there as well.  In the beginning, when 360's exclusives outnumbered PS3's, this made sense...at least to me. They had their exclusives AND all the games that were available on Ps3. Then PS3 started pumping out games left and right, passed them in quantity and as far as the media goes quality as well. I just wonder does the fact they had a few good exclusives in the beginning, and a few good ones that are still coming somehow outway the plethera of exclusive AAAs AND the same Multiplats available elsewhere......if only a few years later?

Restraint thru repulsion: I don't think most of Ps3's exlcusives are niche (Uncharted, GT, Infamous, Killzone, Ratchet,etc) they are just varied. I think the one thing that always made Playstation unique is that is always catered to many different genres and types. Everyone could enjoy most of them but they choose to force hate them or say they are uninterested because its not available to them in the first place. Common psychology says you hate what you can't have, or at least we condition ourselves to be repulsed by things that are actually just out of our grasp anyway for whichever reason.

The problem with many of them(Sony's IPs) is that they get ZERO marketing from Sony and basically sent out to die (ask Insomniac about Resistance 3). If Sony gave their games the same MS Marketing push, they would all be sales titans. Then again, how profitable are they really if hte marketing budget is about equal with dev costs?

I went to a siminar on game development and marketing. They believed that Casual and Hardcore gamers actually play the same amount of hours. What truly differenciates them from each other is the amount of MONEY they spend in the field. Hardcore gamers supposedly spend more money on multiple things, to spread the wealth. While Casuals center their focus on one or two objects of interest as they don't really see themselves as gamers, rather they are joining in on whatever is "new". It was heavily debated on which brings in more cash in the long run. I think the calapse of the Wii, and falling Apple stocks might be an interesting topic for that conversation....



      

      

      

Greatness Awaits

PSN:Forevercloud (looking for Soul Sacrifice Partners!!!)

Around the Network
Trunkin on 23 February 2013
amp316 said:

No more cereal talk.  Heed my warning above.


Well, that's the end of that.

On topic. It's pretty clear that M$ isn't planning on discontinuing the 360 any time soon. The only reason they cut the original Xbox off so quickly was because it was a financial disaster and they wanted to push the next generation. In contrast, the 360 is highly successful and they're still making good money from it. I imagine they'll stop releasing big first party games for it once the 720 launches, but 3rd party support should stay strong.

As far as RRoD is concerned, I think it's safe to assume that M$ won't take the risk of pulling that shit again, as it was extremely costly for them. It's already apparent that they've given themselves plenty of time to get Durango's design just right, so I wouldn't worry about failure rates this time around.

Timed exclusivity is a dirty practice, but that's no reason not to buy a console. Hell, if I knew a console would be getting all of the multiplats first, that's the console I'd go for. Personally, I think rising dev costs has more to do with most games going multiplat than M$ payoffs do, though.

I wouldn't say they "totally abandoned" the hardcore for the last three years. They pumped more money into the latest Halo than ever before, released several XBLA titles, and continue to buy (timed) exclusive content. Their first party support pales in comparison to Sony's, but we'll see what they're doing to rectify that before Durango is released. All signs point to them making a new push for the hardcore market starting next gen, though.

We don't know what features Sony will be charging for with their online service, and we don't know what changes M$ will be making to XBL Gold, so it's too soon to say. PS4 definitely has the edge over the 360 when it comes to online now, but this is a new generation, and things are bound to change.

Lastly, M$ won't get away with leaving as many features out of Durango as they did with the 360, so I don't believe they will. Low memory consoles may not be much of an issue either if they're planning to push the cloud.



disolitude on 23 February 2013
forevercloud3000 said:
disolitude said:

Key arguments -
Timed exclusivity vs real exclusivity
Gamers being abandoned by Microsoft
Tamed fanbase
"Trusting" a company before you buy a console

Holes in theory -
Too many to list

Civilized answer -
People buy what they like and they liked the Xbox and what it had to offer despite some of the problems like RROD.

Last gen PS3 came out late and everything they did was always slightly behind Microsoft. The big games came later, features came later or not at all and all with a console price premium and a bag of empty promises.

How could you trust Sony they will deliver with anything they said at the conference? Even they don't have a clue how the PS4 is going to look like or features its going to have. It may have streaming, or it may not...this sounds like a winning strategy.

Ok...

The only things I listed that aren't pure facts and are slight opinons are Timed Exclusives and Abbandoning of Fanbase, so what Holes?

And the fact they came first, did many things first this gen is great, yet now we are at the end of this gen cycle and they have changed for the worse in many gamer's opinon (maybe not yours and thats fine if not). Knowing what you know NOW about how they opporate, can you see youreself still giving them youre money? at least initially.

And for the PS4 comments, you know those don't hold up as real negatives at all. They gave us hard facts of how the system will work, its specs, etc. Not seeing what it looks like means very little, if anything. They said it will stream, what is unsure sounding about that? Thats not a maybe it is a reality of what the system will do. The only "Maybe" they mentioned at the Meeting that was of note is that "They will try to allow connectivity with as many devices as possible so you can play PS3/PS2/PS1 games everywhere". Everything else....in the bag.

Should I make a comparative list of all the PS3 and Wii's shortcomings as well from this past gen, or better let let you all come up with a comparative list to why the PS3/Wii were far worse options come this generation in. I look forward to seeing that.

I don't know what you're talking about when it comes to this Xbox abandoing gamers.

I owned an xbox since 2006 and PS3 since 2008 and I never felt "abandoned" by either companies. I literally didn't know what to play next between 2006 and 2011.

I've moved away from console gaming the last year but its safe to say that if I had to choose a console for 2012, Xbox would win easily. xbox live kicks ass every year, Halo 4 was awsome, Witcher 2 was fun even if I played it on PC already, Alan Wake american Nightmare DLC was more fun than the full game, Trail Evolution provided at least 20 hours of fun filled gameplay...

So where is this abandonment of "core" gamers you speak of?

As a side note, your OP is like having someone who is an obvious supporter of the blue team, attack the red team for things they have absolutely no insight about. I'm shocked that I'm even willing to post or argue to be honest...



Stinky on 23 February 2013

 

  • MS abandoned the xbox so readily because they were screwed by Nvidia and Intel, leading to massive losses despite the console proving to be popular
  • While the RRoD scope has grown to somewhat legendary status, MS did extend manufacturer warranty to three years from purchase. Please correct yourself.
  • Timed exclusives are better for third parties, otherwise they lose a large amount of sales. Mostly fanboys care about exclusives, which unless they're a guaranteed huge seller which actually move systems, are a loss.
  • It's clear that the hardcore xbox fan is also a fan of the three franchises you listed. More notably, some of the XBLA titles provide great value and challenging gameplay, and as an old-school gamer I value this strategy greatly. Shotgunning random low-profile titles this late in the gen is just a waste of time and money, and competing with third-parties and a massive back catalogue. I have no more problem with kinect games which I have no interest in than I do of similar competitor products, such as Eyepet and WiiFit. All this talk of franchises also conveniently ignores the significant amount of titles which are console exclusive to the 360, which is readily apparent when one goes into a game store.
  • While I would prefer xbox live to be free, the cost isn't so bad and is more than offset by the discounts I receive as a member. I've also won some free movie tickets in the past which defintely offsets it. Xbox live has been the leading service in both features and stability and is one of the reasons I bought an Xbox.
  • This is also a smart strategy. I have no need for WIFI networking and don't use it on any of my gaming systems, why should i pay for it? Why should I pay extra for a rechargable controller when I have a mountain of rechargable AAs already? Who had HDMI enabled TV in 2006? Pay for what you want suits me better than being forced to buy the kitchen sink, especially when none of them are required by many people.


amp316 on 23 February 2013

I changed my mind and reopened the thread, but please keep things on topic because I am not in the mood.



Proud member of the SONIC SUPPORT SQUAD

Tag "Sorry man. Someone pissed in my Wheaties."

"There are like ten games a year that sell over a million units."  High Voltage CEO -  Eric Nofsinger

richardhutnik on 23 February 2013
forevercloud3000 said:

Microsoft did a great job lulling many a gamer in with what they originally offered. Yet, for the last 7 Years I have watched them pull one slick stunt after the next, and generally harm the sanctity of the industry multiple times over.

 

  • When the Original Xbox came out, I was interested. Games like Fable and Jade Empire almost had me. Yet I already had a PS2, wth FF and a hefty load of games that were exclusive to it. I decided I would wait to get the Xbox after it became much cheaper. When the New consoles were finally released I though this was my chance to snag one for a bargain......then it happened. MS officially cut off Xbox shortly after 360's release, this was in complete contrast to how the PS2 still thrived for several years, just like the PS1 did. The way it was immediately discontinued, most ofthe games were field destroyed, just erased....didn't sit well at all with me. I still feel like this is a mantra MS might still hold. More on that later....
  • RROD. MS ignored the many warnings they got from their tech experts to delay the 360's launch so they could figure out a more viable heat syncing solution. MS big wigs could have cared less, because beating Sony to the punch was truly all that mattered. A electronic device with over 40% failure rate that wasn't immediately pulled from market is unheard of. MS's solution to this was to give you a 3 yr warrenty(from LAUNCH and not buy date) where they would fix your console......just so it would break again a month later. In MS's defense, many bring up the PS2's higher than normal failure rate....yet that was small time in comparison really. It was only a rate of like 8%. While working at Gamestop, I watched people buy console after console simply because they kept breaking. When the main reason you chose one console over the next was due to it's low price yet the cost of replacing it comes out to way more.............priceless.
  • Timed Exclusivity: A ridiculous  trade off from real exclusivity if you ask me. I always felt full exclusive games encouraged the best kind of  competition. Mario's success would spur Crash, GT would ignite PGR/Forza, etc, etc. The fact that there are less exclusives these days means there is less reason to buy any particular console(which is what MS wanted) but it also means developers don't have to try nearly as hard to court a fanbase.....and most often, Multiplats feel like a poor man's exclusive Version.
  • Total Abandonment of the Hardcore Gamer in the last 3 years. MS has shown time and time again, that their fanbase is just a name and number. They are only as valuable as how much money they are bringing them. Now this isn't news to us about any business. Sony and Nintendo also want your hard earned dollar. Yet MS completely abandoned the groups that gave them their early success as they no longer needed to appeal to them, they already had you (like some douche college stud who sleeps around for the conquest and nothing more). Once they felt they had the "Hardcore Vote" already, the Hardcore centric games became scarce, and the new Casual push began. This is what 360 fans put up with out of complacency for the last 3 years. MS felt as long as they give their fans 2 key franchises a year(an alternation between Forza,Gears, Halo) that their fanbase would stay TAMED.
  • Charging for what everyone else give for free. We already pay a premium for the internet, why are you paying for a glorified "Membership" that gives you what you rightfully should of had for free? News Flash people, there is very little XboxLive does that PS3 doesn't, contrary to popular beleif. The only true feature of note is XGC.....an overhyped feature from those who are trying to justify that annual fee. Well come PS4 time, you will no longer have that excuse. Vita already has XGC, PS4 will allow it across multiple devices. PS+ is already garnering  far more appeal of late, with its constant sales, free game givaways, auto updates, exclusive betas/demos......on the regular! PS+ isn't required to get basic funtion out of your device, yet people are flocking to it for its REAL value it offers up to you.
  • Cheap scating to APPEAR cheaper. This baffled me when this gen started. Sure, the PS3 was 600 big ones, but in actuality the 360 was just around, if not more. Think about it. Original 360's were coming with no HDMI port, needed batteries for controllers(expensive rechargeable pack sold seperately), no Wifi Built in (When even the damn Wii did), and of course required a Live Sub to play online. Oh but it came with a headset tho....... The system was built around you buying what appears to be a real bargain in comparison to the competition, then get you on the 50million peripherals that will at some point become a necessity.
Someone Please explain to me, after knowing all this, how could MS's efforts be more appealing than Sony or Nintendo's at this point?

 

Hard to very close to impossible doing this, considering where your preferences lie as seen in your signature.  XBox Live offers more for me at silver than PSN does at normal.  I don't play online, and get a lot more content able to be downloaded for free on it.  When it came down to which of the two consoles to move, I moved the PS3.

But, since you have the mind of a Sony partisan, it would really be hard to explain anything to you, because of your preferences.