By using this site, you agree to our Privacy Policy and our Terms of Use. Close
reviniente on 16 October 2011
Edit Thread
Michael-5 said:
reviniente said:
Michael-5 said:
 

I know a ridiculous amount about cars, I'm a nut I'll admit. I'm learning about gaming and corporations in general, but I still have a lot to learn.

Next time you see a 67' Impalla (thats when they were best) outprice a Toyota Camry (a Crown is a Camry in Japan), look at the odometer. There will not be a digit for 100,000km (max 99,999.9km - old fashioned dial), and it's likely the car wil be in the 30-60k range. I used to own a 76 Dodge Aspen, it was the same.

I hate US corperations for the reasons you named. Why would a 20 cent pay raise in China translate to a $50 price hike? It's because Nike and Puma can, and people will pay for the logo.

PSN is awesome, I love it. MS has no reason to charge for XBL. I can get facebook and Zune over the browser on PS3, and Netflicks is available on all consoles now. The only benefit XBL has over PSN is party chat, but why am I paying $60 a year for that? Silver accounts used to grant access to online play for PC/360 games, why did that stop, and why are PC gamers who have Windows live (which has the same features as XBL) still allowed to play for free? MS is greedy, and I can;t stand them as a company. However Halo, Gears and Forza are my 3 favorite exclusive franchises this gen, so I at least can thank them for that.

As for playing more XBL, I don't have the time. With work and school, I want a more functional option. Why do I have to play online all year long, or pick which 3 months I want to play? Why can't I suspend my XBL like I  can my internet?

Doesn't the dial reset after it reaches 99,999.9? You can put more into them can you? Well, never mind that. I'm not going to argue cars with you, but Detroit muscle is a source of pride for most Americans.

Yes, people will pay for the logo, won't they? Strap an alligator on a $12 polo shirt and, lo and behold, you have a $65 Lacoste. Why should that be an ethical dilemma for a corporation? Should they charge below market value just to be able to sleep at night?

Free PSN was a business decision SON¥ made to outsmart Microsoft, and it hasn't quite worked as they intended. Mark my words: free online play is on it's way out.

You don't really pay to play all year long; you just pay x amount, and that amount entitles you to a year of online play. How much you play is up to you. Think of it as treading your oppresive $80 Nike sneakers down to the ground to squeeze every cent out of them; you don't have to, but you might as well do it anyway.

Some old American cars the dial resents, but not all of them. Pre 1980's, American cars were built to last exactly 3 years. After 3 years the car was engineered so everything would break down on you at the same time, and it's not worth repairing. Thats why US cars were beautiful then. All of a sudden, they got ugly, it was because they started making their cars last longer to fend off the Japanese. However to keep profits up, they reduced the price of the material, fired designers, and made basic ugly boxes. Just remember the generic little mustands of the 90's and how ugly the Corvette C4 is compared to the C3. This is why that happened.

Clothing corporations can easily pay their employees proper wages and lose a 1-2% profit margin. Nike Shoes cost about 40 cents to make, if they paid their employees a reasonable fair, that could go up to $2. If Nike raised the price of shoes $1.60, people would not notice, but there would be some justice to that corporation.

I disagree with you about free PSN. It's one major reason PS3 sales are stronger in EMEAA. It's cutting into Sony's profit, yes, but Japanese corporations aren't as greedy as US ones. It's here to stay, and I bet Nintendo will expand on it with Wii U.

No I pay x amount to play 12 months, and if I don't play 6 of those months I threw x/2 amount away. I should have more online pass options, maybe paying for x many hours, or making 3 months cars reasonably priced.

With those 80 cent Nike shoes I can wear them out in 1 year or 5 years. It's my choice when I want to wear them, it's my choice when I want to throw them out, and If I feel like it I can buy another pair of shoes and hold off wearing those Nike shoe out. So comparing this to 360. If I play my Wii, or DS for 6 months instead of my 360, where is my option to suspend my XLB?

Your EMEAA argument is ludicrous. As if PSN were free only in Europe or in the Middle East. You think Americans don't like free stuff? Of course they do, but they rather pay for a better product (online play), and a more thought out gaming experience than a free half-baked one. Brand recognition and SON¥'s good reputation with consumer electronics keeps the PS3 ahead in most markets, not free PSN. C'mon Michael, really. You're starting to drop the ball. 

You actually think Nintendo will tolerate free online play? They sell their wares at a profit from the get-go, never at a loss, and now you're entertaining the notion that somehow they'll invest in a reliable, full-featured and efficient online infrastructure that will compete with LIVE and PSN, and end up giving it away for free? This is fantasy.

So, in short, is the current lack of a one-month-at-a-time or a 6-month LIVE membership that you can cancel at any time leaving you dissatisfied? Sounds to me like you're complaining about a paid service. Sounds to me like you want free. Remember, a one-year membership to LIVE entitles you to play online for one year; wether or not you choose to do so, it's up to you.