Aura7541 said:
Machiavellian said:
Aura7541 said:
To build up on my analogy earlier, the difference between me in the analogy and MS is that MS took the wrong path repeatedly. What is even worse is that MS tried to justify it. We all saw the infamous Angry Joe interview with Major Nelson. And ugh... the infamous "We have a product for people who can't get online, it's called Xbox 360" quote by Don Mattrick really crossed the line.
Let's compare this to, for example, Freedom Wars being released in retail in Europe. Vita fans complained to SCEE that they want the physical game and thus, Sony responded in a timely fashion. Huge difference between these two scenarios. (Note that I'm NOT saying Sony listens to consumers and MS does not. I'm merely providing examples to point out the differences between listening to consumers vs listening to consumers after not listening to them initially). |
Could you clarify on MS going down the wrong path repeatedly. Are we talking about the X1 or in general.
@Bolded: Oh I totally agree with those being a very bad moment in PR from MS. Don statement was just plain dumb and Larry was complete ignorance.
@2nd Bolded: I am not sure I see the difference. Before E3, how did consumers get a chance to tell MS they were on the wrong page. It was during E3 that everything was revealed. During and after E3 MS received constant info from cunsumers, bloggers and press that gamers were unhappy with the console direction. What is the difference then what you just wrote. Sony released a game without a disk, gamers complained they wanted a disk, Sony gave them a disk. In your analogy, Sony would never have released the game without a physical copy because they would have known gamers wanted it.
Would not your analogy be correct if MS released the X1 exactly how they advertised it at E3 after getting constant feedback from consumers that they did not want this type of console then change it up.
|
@1st Bolded. I'm talking about the X1.
@ 2nd Bolded. If you read the the text inside the parantheses, you'll find your answer. The difference was the time it took for Sony and MS to react. One company took a significantly shorter time to react than the other.
|
How was MS response or how timly they reacted not fast. E3 2013 was June 11 - 13. MS made their policy change June 19th. How fast do you think it takes to completly change your policy and direction for a product that was years in the making.
I also have to say that the 2 scenerios are not equal. Sony only needed to provide a disc for a game, MS has to throw out basically everything they wanted to do which I am sure cost them millions. If we are going to compare scenerios that could be on the same level then the PS hack would be it. It took Sony 2 weeks before they confirmed there was a hack and that customer info was compromised. Both scenerios cost both companies millions.
