| Dodece said: @Played_Out Microsoft spent the money to purchase exclusivity. They have every right to decide which platforms the title will be published on. That said your throwing a conniption fit for the wrong reason. Out of all three manufacturers they are the ones giving you the fairest shake. Sony requires that you spend four hundred dollars on their hardware before taxes. Nintendo requires that you spend two hundred and fifty dollars on their hardware before taxes. Microsoft actually has a option that will cost you less then a hundred dollars. Gasp buying Vista is a hell of a lot cheaper then buying a console. Double gasp since it is a Windows product it can do things other then gaming. Exactly why are you mad at Microsoft for letting you save a massive amount of money? I see you want them to support XP forever. You know just like Sony still puts out games for the PS1 and Nintendo still makes games for the Super Nintendo. Wait neither Nintendo or Sony do that. Nintendo just makes you buy the games you already paid for again to play them on the virtual console, and Sony will not even let you play your PS2 games on their new machine. Microsoft might be taking you for more money, but everyone takes you for more money that is how the system works. The difference is Microsoft is giving you a more cost effective option, and because they actually support the PC unlike Sony of Nintendo you get by without even having to buy hardware. Thanks to Microsoft your actually getting better gaming on the PC then you would otherwise. Basically stop bitching about it. Go out and pick up your copy of Vista, and your set for next generation gaming granted that your hardware can handle it. |
I think you've missed the point somewhat. I believe that paying for console exclusivity is a perfectly legitimate strategy for MS to adopt in order to make their platform more attractive to the consumer, so Sony and Nintendo are completely irrelevant to the point I was trying to make.
And the issue of forking out cash for a new OS is of little consequence to me as I could almost certainly get a free copy of Vista on a bulk license from someone in IT. The problem I have is that Microsoft is essentially trying to force the consumer (me!) to buy into a substandard product that will negatively affect my gaming experience! Vista is a worthless memory-hogging piece of bloatware that provides absolutely no practical advantage for me over XP. Not to mention the fact that DX10 is crippling to framerates.
If Vista offered performance enhancements over XP, I would upgrade without question. In fact, it offers quite the opposite. Unfortunately, due to Microsoft's market position, I will almost certainly be forced to upgrade at some point in the future. Microsoft's core business model is barely within the confines of monopoly laws, and has occasionally spilled over (hence the EU spankings). Forgive me for not being happy about it.
