By using this site, you agree to our Privacy Policy and our Terms of Use. Close
irstupid on 01 October 2013
Edit Thread
thismeintiel said:
irstupid said:
thismeintiel said:

The 360's muilti-disc games, as well as MS switching to Blu-ray, disagrees with you.

Nintendo doesn't use Blu Ray.  

Blu Ray was anti-consumer last gen if kinect is this gen.  It was an extra added that was NOT needed.  PS3 could have still worked with a dvd drive instead of blu ray.  The Blu Ray drive was an un-NEEDed expense.  It was not NEEDED.  No arguing over if it was a good thing or wanted, the fact was it was not NEEDED to play games.  A cheaper alternative would have worked (dvd drive) or any drive, hell Nintendo hasn't ever even had a dvd drive.  Not sure what you call them, but they have never been able to play dvd's or blu rays or any type of movie format.

So is adding something not NEEDED anti-consumer?

OR

is what you guys seem to be arguing "Whatever I don't like is anti-consumer"  You liked blu ray and thus thinks its a bonus gift, you don't like kinect and thus think its anti-consumer.  So OPINION it is.   But difference is, some games REQUIRE kinect to play.  No games require blu ray to play.

Nintendo isn't using Blu-ray?  You may want to look that up again.  The fact is they are using Blu-ray tech, however, in order to not have to pay any fees, they don't allow playback of movies.  Same thing with the Wii and DVD.  I mean you didn't think it is just a coincidence that single-layer Blurays are 25GB, the EXACT same amount as a Wii U disc?  And their console is slightly more poweful than the PS3, so I guess they felt the larger sized Blu-ray was necessary for 7th gen, as well.

I just knew Wii U disc dont' look like Blu Ray disc, and the Wii U can't play Blu Ray discs so I didn't know what they were.

But that kind fo proves my point.  They found a cheaper alternative.  

According to you guys anything that is not needed to PLAY GAMES and adds cost to the console is anti-consumer.  So if Nintendo used real blu rays, then that would be anti-consumer acording to you guys since it WASN'T needed to play games.  

At least that is the argument I'm hearing in regards to Kinect.  It's not NEEDED to play games, so its anti-consumer.  Just like Blu Ray was back on PS3.  It wasn't needed.  They could have gone with a cheaper disc drive and still been able to play games.  Thus anti-consumer right?

NOw this isn't what I believe.  By your definition industries would become 100% stagnate.  You coudl never introduce new tech cause in your opinion you could play games before.  We should all still be playing with nes controllers or atari sticks or wahtever you want to say.  Those controllers worked right, no need to ever bring in new methods.  Why does the PS3/4 controller have the whole six-axis things.  You could play games forever without needed to tilt the controller.  Why is there a touch pad on the ps4 controller.  You got by for how many years without needing to rub off your controller.  

Btw to those who brought up Blu Ray, a better argument would have been the touch pad on the DS4 controller in comparison to Kinect.  oh and also the tech inside the DS4 controller that is used when you have a camera.  If I never buy a pseye then isn't that tech just a useless expense I paid for?  Isn't that what your arguing Kinect is.  A useless expense you will NEVER use.  Well i want my DS4 controller to be cheaper and you to remove six-axis and the light sensor thing, vibration and touch pad.  none of those are needed for gaming.  I have pc controllers with none of those and play games fine.  My mouse and keyboard have one of those and I play games fine, heck even better than fine, better than a controller in most cases.