By using this site, you agree to our Privacy Policy and our Terms of Use. Close
S.T.A.G.E. on 27 January 2012
Edit Thread
Rainbird said:
S.T.A.G.E. said:
Rainbird said:

I agree completely with the fact that Microsoft was wrong when they said bluray was dying. That's why I said "I doubt Microsoft would launch a new game console/media center that can't play blurays." in the first post I made in response to you.

My issue is with your statement "Microsoft always ends up following Sony's lead", which is still blatantly wrong and trollish.

Name certain things different and correct outside of Xbox Live that Microsoft did write and we'll see if they dont attribute something to Sony.

Alright, here are some:

There is the general philosophy behind their consoles. Before the Vita, Sony built all its consoles with the aim for them to be technological marvels. Microsoft's philosophy is to make it as easy as possible for developers to get good results. This is a difference that is very much highlighted by the PS3 and the 360. The Vita is built from the same philosophy as Microsoft's in fact, so if anything, Sony are the ones following Microsoft in that regard.

If I say Kinect, you will of course say that Sony had the Eye Toy, but Microsoft and Sony have used very different approaches. Kinect is fully integrated into 360, where the 360 interface is built to be controllable via Kinect just as easily as with a normal controller, not to mention all the voice command functionality of Kinect that is also built into the system. Nothing like that was ever done with Eye Toy and even the Move has just been tacked on to the XMB.

Microsoft were also the first to use a harddrive in their console, an approach Sony "copied" with the PS3.

Microsoft also bundled all 360s with a microphone so every 360 owner had the needed equipment for doing voice chat.

But please do tell me why Xbox Live doesn't count. Microsoft is by far the leader of the three when it comes to online service, where they were the first to bring these to consoles:

 

  • Achievements
  • Parties
  • Cross game voice chat
  • Digital movie delivery
  • Downloadable games
  • Beacons
So no, Microsoft definitely isn't just following Sony's lead.

 


As I said, take away Xbox Live because truthfully thats Microsofts ONLY strength. Everyones been trying to do online gaming but Microsoft SUCEEDED. Theres a difference because their main focus much like Windows is in OS and products with online capabilities. This is exactly what they helped Sega with.

1.Saw Sony was creating the ultimate home console and wanted in

2. copied Sonys ten year plan .

3. 2nd Console design reminiscent of the PS2 (especially in black)

4. Followed Sony's lead with the DVD format and thinks Sony will do it again but implements Blu Ray...Microsoft says "****! lets help out HD DVD".

5. Rushed the quality of their majority of their sold consoles to take a page out of Sonys book and endear themselves to third parties before Sony could introduce their dev kits.

6. Take great pride in collecting 3rd party titles synonymous with Sony and painting it as a victory and not shining light over great titles like the Witcher 2 which dont get enough press to the masses. Take last year for instance, they put Insomniacs new game up as if it was exclusive and had zero gameplay footage. Microsoft has always known Sony is synonymous with quality where games are concerned, and in order to be that way they must align themselves with those companies. The only difference is a lot of the third party titles they are now getting never rose to prominance with them outside of Gears.

Should I go on?