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

Forums - Gaming Discussion - If the Amazon poll happened after Microsoft's DRM reversal

So a few days ago there was that Amazon poll asking consumers whether they were more interested in the PS4 or the Xbox One. The PS4 destroyed the poll with 95% of the votes, leaving the One with only 5%. My question is, what do you guys think the numbers would be like if another similar poll were held now, after Microsoft changed their DRM strategy?

Obviously, MS's announcements will have a positive effect on the public perception of the console. But do you think that's enough? Would the Xbone would capture around 50% of the vote at this point if another poll was conducted? Perhaps even more? What would your expected numbers be?

Discuss.



Around the Network

90%-10%... Sony fans would still spam the hell out of it.



On 2/24/13, MB1025 said:
You know I was always wondering why no one ever used the dollar sign for $ony, but then I realized they have no money so it would be pointless.

NightDragon83 said:
90%-10%... Sony fans would still spam the hell out of it.

Really? I can't imagine the internet is THAT pro-Sony. With the awesome exclusives MS showed at E3 no longer being obscured by DRM talk, don't you think the results would be somewhat closer?



NightDragon83 said:
90%-10%... Sony fans would still spam the hell out of it.

Agreed. I mean, they're online and using an always connected online device to complain about a device that only requires a check in every 24 hours. Most of the people here are OK but come on, where is the logic in that?



ironmanDX said:
NightDragon83 said:
90%-10%... Sony fans would still spam the hell out of it.

Agreed. I mean, they're online and using an always connected online device to complain about a device that only requires a check in every 24 hours. Most of the people here are OK but come on, where is the logic in that?

Requiring internet access to use the internet is a lot different than requiring internet access to play a game that doesn't use the internet. The idea is that if you want to go somewhere where you don't have internet, you should still be able to play singleplayer games on your console. Personally, it never bothered me much but I can understand why some people had a problem with it.



Around the Network
DucksUnlimited said:
NightDragon83 said:
90%-10%... Sony fans would still spam the hell out of it.

Really? I can't imagine the internet is THAT pro-Sony. With the awesome exclusives MS showed at E3 no longer being obscured by DRM talk, don't you think the results would be somewhat closer?

Nah, of course the internet isn't that pro-Sony.  To me, Sony fans remind me of the Ron Paul supporters from the 2008 US presidential election cycle... they're few but dedicated, and would troll any online poll or forum to make it seem as if Ron Paul had way more support than he actually did.

The funny thing though is that without all the DRM stuff to hide behind and point fingers at, the biggest stories that came out of Sony's E3 showing were...

1) KHIII is coming, and it's NOT a PS4 exclusive, and

2) You now have to pay to play online on PS4

And that's it.  Just about every game demo'd was multiplatform, and the few exclusives shown were ones we had known about for awhile, including FFXV, which was announced more than 7 years ago, and is for all intents and purposes "Versus XIII".



On 2/24/13, MB1025 said:
You know I was always wondering why no one ever used the dollar sign for $ony, but then I realized they have no money so it would be pointless.

DucksUnlimited said:
ironmanDX said:
NightDragon83 said:
90%-10%... Sony fans would still spam the hell out of it.

Agreed. I mean, they're online and using an always connected online device to complain about a device that only requires a check in every 24 hours. Most of the people here are OK but come on, where is the logic in that?

Requiring internet access to use the internet is a lot different than requiring internet access to play a game that doesn't use the internet. The idea is that if you want to go somewhere where you don't have internet, you should still be able to play singleplayer games on your console. Personally, it never bothered me much but I can understand why some people had a problem with it.

I can see it for some people but 90% of the people or more had stable internet connection. A pro of being able to share as many games as you wanted with 10 people of your choosing surely heavily out-weighs the con of the 24 hour check. We all could have saved $1000s...



70% Sony / 30% MS



sony 30% / M$ 70%



Sony would still win



VITA 32 GIG CARD.250 GIG SLIM & 160 GIG PHAT PS3