| Dodece said: No I am pointing out that there were actual genuine victims, and celebrating this news is taking pleasure in their misfortune. I don't like the notion of anybody being treated as if they were expendable. Sony with help from some rather insidious supporters actively perpetrated a campaign of misinformation. That is now seemingly resulting in decent gamers taking it up the ass. They were told they were getting a console that was going to have fantastic support for ten years, and now it is looking like they are only going to get half of that. You know this may come as somewhat of a revelation to you, but I am a gamer first and foremost. I don't like to see my fellow gamers getting fucked over by any company. Especially if they get taken for a lot of fucking money. Sometimes what is best for Sony, or for the companies most rabid fans. Isn't what is in the interest of most of the gamers on the platform. If you have the money to buy the PS4, and buy all of these games starting on day one. Well that is wonderful for you, but you shouldn't be acting as if the people who are going to be staying with the PS3 for two or three more years deserve to be treated with such utter contempt by Sony. Sony supporting its new platform is a good thing, but what isn't good is their obvious willingess to abandon their loyal customers on earlier platforms. Who may have believed they were going to get better then this. I mean it is nothing less then dispicable on their part. They didn't need to retask every single one of their studios to making games for the new platform. They could have held two or three back to support their other customers. Setting aside the PS3 for a moment how is this even remotely justifiable given that the Vita hasn't even been on the market for two years. Maybe you can help me with this. Why is it I am the only one in this thread arguing that PS3/Vita owners deserve to be treated with more respect. What I want is for this community to acknowledge their worth. Seventy million plus customers are getting abandoned, and there is no good reason to let it pass without any comment being made on their behalf. Dwell on this for a moment. Even if you plan to move onto greener pastures. You are probably as of right now part of a community that is already having the screws put to it. Be glad that you are planning to get out, but take a moment to feel something for those that are going to be left behind. How hard is it really to say good for me, but I feel sorry for the other guy. You know what the opposite of love is. It isn't hate, but indifference. Just plain not caring about the effect of something is going to have on someone else. If I buy the next box, and someone on my friends list cannot afford to buy one, and I found out that Microsoft wasn't going to be supporting that platform with first party games anymore. I would at least take a moment to recognize the unfairness of it all for them. |
Let's keep the discussion on the PS3, not the Vita. As that's why I responded to you.
Again, no one geniunely expected the PS3 to have ten strong years of first party support. That strategy was never explicitly or implicitly stated by Sony. As you have admitted yourself, that was just a piece of fabricated rhetoric used by fanboys on internet forums. Since only a significantly small portion of PS3 owners browse internet forums, only a significantly small portion of PS3 owners have even heard of this strategy, let alone believed in its validity. The fact that a person browses internet forums and even knows what first party support is, means they are relatively informed of the industry, decreasing their chances for actually believing such nonsense to zero. So I don't think there were any "genuine victims" who expected the PS3 to recieve heavy first party support for ten years. If that's the argument you are trying to make then you need to provide me with some reason to believe people actually believed that crap that's spewed by fanboys.
For the sake of the argument, let's assume a few gullible people believed in the fanboys that said the PS3 would have strong first party support for ten years. How in any way does that mean Sony is screwing them over? Sony never made a commitment to ten strong years of first party support, so why should they be obligated to follow such a plan just because a few dimwits decided to trust extreme fanboys? That logic makes no sense. A company is not obligated to do what its extreme fanboys say they are going to do on the internet. Just because I repeatedly and passionately say a company will do X, doesn't mean the company has any reason to actually do X. Keep in mind the percentage of gamers who would have fell for this fanboy rhetoric is infinitesimally small, so Sony actually would only hurt an extremely population, and it still wouldn't be their fault; it would be the fault of the gamers for their extreme gullibility and the fault of fanboys for their lies.
Ignoring the above. In your later paragraphs, it seems like you're making the argument that a company should continue strong first party support during years 8+, regardless of what many may have believed from fanboys, or for what they have said. Why? Why is there an inherent moral obligation for a company to provide strong first party support for ten years? Never in the history of console gaming has any company provided such support. It's normal for them to decrease first party support after 6-7 years. So why is it bad when Sony does it, especially considering they never said it would? That's the nature of the business. If you have a problem with Sony slowing support in the later years, then you have a problem with the general business of the industry. Besides, the PS3 will undoubtedly get relatively strong 3rd party support in its latter years, so Sony is actually above the norm in that regard.
