| BMaker11 said: If you really are the "casual gamer" that you say you are, then no, I wouldn't expect you to know just about any of those things you just said. You wouldn't care. You wouldn't look up how MS is spending their money and how it went to ads instead of studios. You'd just see a CoD commercial and think "sick! Glad I got a 360. I get the best content". You wouldn't look up how much the failure rate was and that MS spent billions to fix it. You'd just know that you got a free replacement if your Xbox broke. so on and so forth. But why are you damage controlling the nickel and diming? "Oh, you can just get a wired controller"....ok, so what about 4 player local multiplayer? I'm sure Halo just be awesome if only one other player could play locally (just from personal experience, I had a much better time when we had 4 on one screen going online). "Oh, I never needed WiFi, so why would I need the peripheral"....not everyone has the luxury of the house router to be near the game system. Most people have the modem next to the computer. If you have a modem/router next to an entertainment center in the front room because the computer is right next to it....good for you. But don't undermine the fact that millions of people don't have setups like that. More and more people have laptops nowadays for a reason, and I guarantee you it's not so they can be wired in when they go on the internet. Gaming is the same. I know I want to be able to plug my system up anywhere in the house and be able to get online, not be limited to wherever the router is. I'm not saying that the 360 cannot be enjoyed without buying all those extras, but that's because "enjoyed" has to be looked at really subjectively here. But let's just ignore all that and go with you being the "casual gamer" who got to enjoy his system. You bought a 20GB in 2007 and 3 years of Live? You just nullified the very first statement in your response. And btw, you said Sony now charges for online because they think people will pay for a quality service, after looking at the XBL model. Understand that XBL isn't a "service"; it is a "fee". A "fee" to play what you already own. Games come with an online portion and you couldn't play that portion, that is on the disc, unless you paid the fee. That's ALL XBL is for, to pay for things you should already be able to do (Netflix, Hulu, Internet Explorer, game online....you have to pay for it). PS+, on the other hand, I'd call a "service", because you get compensated for your money: free games, massive discounts, etc. The fact that multiplayer is now behind a paywall (for PS4 at least) is kinda crappy, and I would consider that portion a "fee" now, but other than that, what else is a PS+ subscriber paying for that they should just be able to do? Use the internet browser? Watch Hulu, Crackle, WWE Network, Netflix, CrunchyRoll, etc? Have ads everywhere (lol)? No. A "service" is the something you pay for and get something in return. A "fee" is just annoying. And having to pay to play your is not "getting something in return" when playing online is just part of the $60 you already paid for the game. And that's all XBL is for |
Damage controling... no I'm not. I give Ms a slap where it is due, just like you. But I also give Ms merit where it is due unlike you.
Every action as two side, you would want me to look only a the bad one and say look Ms is pure evil, nothing they do is right, and that is simply not true.
You said that I call myself a casual gamers but I ain't cause I know to much. I refer myself as a casual gamer based on the time I play, yes i'm hyped on some games and products related to gaming and i'm well informed but I do not play enough to call myself a true gamer.
You reprehend Ms for removing 4 player split screen and I agree with you on this point, it would have been great, but let me remind you that four player split screen have been lacking on many title released by competitor and yes it shows Ms will to push their online platform but that is not the sole purpose of it.(killzone 2 did not have split screen support ether)
"And btw, you said Sony now charges for online because they think people will pay for a quality service, after looking at the XBL model". No i Said that Sony now charge for online gaming because they looked back at there own mistake not because they looked at Ms model.
You reprehend Ms for not including a wifi adapter. yet How many system did have a wifi adapter before 2006? Should we look at the problem the other way and say that Sony included a wifi adapter to justify the higher price point? It is true that the separate adapter was expensive, too expensive yes and I agree but should Xbox 360 had a bundle with wifi adapter and charge and additionnal 50 bucks I would not have bought cause, like millions of others, I did not care about wifi.
"You bought a 20GB in 2007 and 3 years of Live? You just nullified the very first statement in your response." you're completely ignoring "I never felt the obligation of having it" which prove my point of it not being a fee but a service.
"But don't undermine the fact that millions of people don't have setups like that." Yes I agree but the others millions would have paid for nothing.
You want to point out that everything Ms has done is in a way to get more money in their pockets. But if we look back at the previous gen, the one that was literaly printing money was Nintendo. You would have liked the Xbox 360's business model to be more like the ps3 one, but the ps3 was a financial disaster. Ms did overall barely made profit if any at all mainly because of the rrod fiasco but even without, their profit would not as good Nintendo or Sony with the ps1 or ps2 because they reinvested more than the other.
