If MS doesn't come 1st next gen or the gen after , should they pull out ?

[TheSteve]

Bitmap Frogs said:

Smashchu2 said:

Bitmap Frogs said:

That's FUD because he's trying to paint Microsoft has the Four Horsemen so people reject it on that basis alone.

By the way, you are linking from a place called the Wiikly and the first page has Gates next to a RROD while the article is called "Why Microsoft will leave the console business" (or something similar).

Nice one, what are you gonna link next, www.sonydefenseforce.com ?

First off, if you think he is spreading FUD, you don't know what FUD. He was never trying to instill doubt into people's mind for the purpose of them not buying a product (that is a Microsoft tactic BTW). He only said that Microsoft was in the console business to help PC gaming. How is that FUD? How could one even assume that from the subject of his argument? You have had a bad habit of twisting things around to some bizzar line of thought to showing how everyone that doesn't agree is an ememy.

Also, I love how you don't acknowledge the article becuase it comes from a site with "Wii" in the name. Rather then actually read it and try to claim it has errors, you dismiss it becuase it must be for Wii fanboys (NOTE: Trhis line of argument is flawed because you have to claim that all sites with "Wii" in the name MUST be unreliable in talking about Microsoft. Since this is improbable, your argument can not hold.[All sites with "Wii" in their name are wrong about Microsoft:The Wiikly has Wii in it's name;Thus, Wiilky is wrong about Microsof). I also love how I must be a huge fanboy who just links to "stupid" sites (again, you question my validity to try and prove a point). I know I am right becuase you are so caught up in insecurities and poor arguments. You can't take the points blow for blow so you try to ddance around them. This only works if I was to play the game. Since I know you are doing this (by attacking people's validity and the validity of the source) it shows me that you are wrong and can obnly resort to this in order to avoid being wrong.

 

I wanted to save you the embarrassment but, hey you are asking for it.

By the way, do you know what FUD stands for? It's for Fear, Uncertainity and Doubt. He was purposedly attempt to instill fear about Microsoft's success in the market - specifically he was claiming Microsoft's success is equal to the destruction of the consoles. You obviously missed the whole shebang since it appears you like that line of thought. But more on that later.

That "article" (and I am loosely using the word) is eleven pages of drivel written in 2006. Much like you and other forum dwellers at VGChartz, the "writer" decided his conclusion first and then proceeded to cherrypick to support his preconceived opinion. In this case, the goal of that mess of words was to support the idea Microsoft would soon pull out of the console business. Early on this gen (2006-2007) it was a common piece of FUD floating around (Microsoft pulling off the plug on the Xbox). Amongst the many deranged claims made there, and mind you we are taking eleven pages of drivel, are:

- Claiming a 360 installed base of 20 million in 2011.

- Claiming the 360 business unit would never make a dime.

- Claiming Microsoft would 100% for sure kill the division before the current generation ends.

- Insinuating the 360 had no future as a platform from third-parties and that games outside of Microsoft Game Studios would only come as long as Microsoft paid for them.

- Claiming Microsoft can't compete in the console videogame market.

- Then, the article supposedly about why Microsoft would pull off the console market gets into relevant materials as to the topic like Zune bashing, smearing Microsoft's marketing practices (which aren't ethical of course, but neither are Sony's nor Nintendo's nor Apple's for that matter... see a trend there?).

In a nutshell, you quoted a load of unresearched drivel, more akin to a propaganda piece than to a journalistic article. Which is no wonder, since it's on a Wii-centric website.

At this point you either:

a) lose all kinds of mental barriers and just swallow whatever it's thrown at you as long as you agree with the basic premise (in this case, Microsoft bashing).

b) are somehow challenged.

c) are intentionally spreading Microsoft hate, for whatever reason.

Which one is yours?

What a superb tongue-lashing.  That site is the equivalent of an overdrawn fanboy rant.